Cases compared
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, Petitioner v. Sean O'Day, in His Official Capacity as Director of the Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services vs. Anthony Lewis v. HCA Florida Lawnwood Hospital vs. Mark B. Cohen, Petitioner v. Judicial Conduct Board of Pennsylvania
First Amendment cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
No. 25-1018No. 25-1041No. 25-1215
Side by side
| Fact | Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, Petitioner v. Sean O'Day, in His Official Capacity as Director of the Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services | Anthony Lewis v. HCA Florida Lawnwood Hospital | Mark B. Cohen, Petitioner v. Judicial Conduct Board of Pennsylvania |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docket | 25-1018 | 25-1041 | 25-1215 |
| Status | Before Arguments | Dismissed | Before Arguments |
| Date | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) | October Term 2025 (2025–2026) |
| Question presented | 1. When a state law requires a pharmaceutical company to file reports with the government disclosing information about drug pricing, does that law violate the company’s right to free speech? 2. When a state law permits disclosure of trade secrets reported to a state regulatory body if that disclosure is in the public interest, is that law facially invalid under this Court’s precedent expressly permitting the disclosure of trade secrets in some circumstances? | 1. Whether the district court deprived Dr. Lewis and his counsel of their statutory or procedural right to amend the First Amended Complaint without leave of court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). 2. Whether the district court violated Dr. Lewis’s and his counsel’s First Amendment right to petition pursuant to the holding in NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963) (First Amendment) and its progeny. 3. Whether the district court violated Dr. Lewis’s and his counsel’s Thirteenth Amendment right to petition pursuant to the holding in Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3, 22 (1883) (Thirteenth Amendment; Civil Rights Act of 1866) and its progeny. | Whether content-based restrictions on the speech of sitting judges must satisfy strict scrutiny, such that the decision of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania violates the First Amendment. |
| Summary | Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America challenges an Oregon law requiring drugmakers to submit and publicly disclose reports explaining certain drug-price increases, including information the group says may contain trade secrets. The petition argues that the law violates the First Amendment by compelling speech and the Fifth Amendment by allowing publication of confidential business information without compensation. | Dr. Anthony Lewis sought Supreme Court review of lower-court proceedings involving HCA Florida Lawnwood Hospital. His petition, which was dismissed, argued that the district court wrongly prevented him from amending his complaint as allowed by the federal rules and violated asserted First and Thirteenth Amendment rights to petition the courts. | Mark B. Cohen has asked the Supreme Court to review a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision involving limits on what sitting judges may say. He argues that the First Amendment requires courts to apply the highest level of constitutional review to content-based restrictions on judges’ speech. |
Relationship
- Shared issue
- First Amendment
- Why compared
- Reviewed First Amendment tags connect these current-term public cases.
Related
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.