Litigators from Latham & Watkins notched a big—and speedy—win on Monday when a federal judge in Washington, D.C. voided a Department of Health and Human Services rule that would have required drugmakers in television ads to disclose the list price of a 30-day supply of the medicine.

The rule was scheduled to go into effect today.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta sounded slightly regretful about his decision, which came a mere 24 days after the complaint by Merck, Eli Lilly and Amgen plus the Association of National Advertisers was filed.

“To be clear, the court does not question HHS's motives” in adopting the rule, he wrote. “Nor does it take any view on the wisdom of requiring drug companies to disclose prices. That policy very well could be an effective tool in halting the rising cost of prescription drugs. But no matter how vexing the problem of spiraling drug costs may be, HHS cannot do more than what Congress has authorized. The responsibility rests with Congress to act in the first instance.”

And Mehta was clear that Congress has not given HHS the power to impose the rule.

“[T]his case is not just about whether HHS can force drug companies to disclose their list prices in the name of lowering costs. Rather, the [rule] represents a significant shift in HHS's ability to regulate the health care marketplace. Congress surely did not envision such an expansion of regulatory authority when it granted HHS the power to issue regulations necessary to carry out the 'efficient administration' of the Medicare and Medicaid programs.”

The Latham team representing the pharmaceutical companies included Benjamin Snyder, Daniel Meron, Sarah Gragert and Richard Bress.

Davis Wright Tremaine's Robert Corn-Revere and Ronald London represented the Association of National Advertisers—though the court in finding HHS exceeded its authority did not get to their First Amendment argument that the ads were compelled speech.