CVS, Meth Dealer
Mandatory 'overcompliance'
In October, CVS Pharmacy agreed to a $75 million fine for its purported contributions to the illicit methamphetamine trade. It is the largest civil penalty ever assessed for a violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act. "This case shows what happens when companies fail to follow their ethical and legal responsibilities," U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. told the Associated Press.
Sounds damning. You'd think CVS employees were shipping meth in company trucks or cooking the stuff up in the drugstore chain's bathrooms. In fact, CVS's offense was being insufficiently suspicious of its customers when they purchased cold or allergy medicine containing pseudoephedrine, an ingredient also used to make meth.
The case against CVS reflects the federal government's increasing reliance on private actors to enforce America's vice laws. It also demonstrates the feds' eagerness to prosecute companies that don't participate with sufficient enthusiasm. In 2005's Operation Meth Merchant, for example, federal officials arrested 49 convenience store clerks in Georgia for selling legal meth ingredients to undercover agents posing as customers. The clerks were charged with felonies for not refusing the sales after agents used meth slang in the store. Forty-five of the 49 arrestees were Indian immigrants who spoke little English.
As for CVS, Assistant U.S. Attorney Shana Mintz concedes the company didn't intend to break any laws. But apparently that doesn't matter. "Rather than choosing to overcomply like their competitors did," Mintz told the Associated Press, "they knowingly undercomplied with the law."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
is good
perfect
perfect
perfect
How about mbt kisumu sandals this one: there are X driving deaths a year- what % of driving deaths (or serious injuries) involve alcohol, or other intoxicating substances? kisumu 2 People are pretty darn good drivers when they are not impaired.
outlet
outlet
outlet
outlet
impairment" that corresponds to a probability nike shox tl3 of an accident. Standard psychomotor tests of impairment do not test driving habits. For instance almost *all* people over the age of 60 are "impaired" in terms of those tests, oakely sunglasses but these people do not have a higher accident rate. Older people develop compensatory driving habits
Thanks
The case against CVS reflects the federal government's increasing reliance on private actors to enforce America's vice laws. It also demonstrates the feds' eagerness to prosecute companies that don't participate with sufficient enthusiasm. In 2005's Operation Meth Merchant, for example, ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ??????? ??? ?????? ?????? federal officials arrested 49 convenience store clerks in Georgia for selling legal meth ingredients to undercover agents posing as customers. The clerks were charged with felonies for not refusing the sales after agents used meth slang in the store. Forty-five of the 49 arrestees were Indian immigrants who spoke little English.