Whitaker, Julian v. Thompson, Tommy

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding product's labeling may be used to infer its intended use and, thus, whether it is an unapproved drug under FDCA
• deferring to the Food and Drug Administration's interpretation of statutory definitions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
• rejecting argument that claims about product were protected speech and explaining that “the use of speech to infer intent . . . is constitutionally valid”
• deferring to the Food and Drug Administration’s interpretation of statutory definitions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
• seeing “no basis for finding any unambiguously expressed intent of Congress” where the sentences at issue “might mean” one thing and “might mean” another (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[I]t is constitutionally permissible for the FDA to use speech, in the form of labeling, to infer intent for purposes of determining that Whitaker’s proposed sale of saw palmetto extract would constitute the forbidden sale of an unapproved drug.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).