In CASE 11Sorrell V

Multiple Choice

In CASE 1.1Sorrell v.IMS Health Inc.,drug manufacturers challenged as unconstitutional a Vermont statute prohibiting pharmacies form selling prescriber-identifying information for marketing prescription drugs without the consent of prescribers.The U.S.Supreme Court ruled that:

A) although speech promoting marketing was not protected by the First Amendment, the law was unconstitutional based on the due process clause.
B) the statute regulated commercial speech which was evaluated under an "intermediate" standard and that the law was, therefore, constitutional.
C) the statute did not involve constitutional issues and was, therefore, a permissible type of regulation.
D) the conduct prohibited by the law was protected by the First Amendment and that the law was unconstitutional.