The more common scenario nowadays is for a US state to "legalize" a drug that is illegal Federally, namely cannabis. This scenario has been well-researched and it is well-settled that the superiority of Federal law ensures that cannabis remains unlawful to possess throughout the country despite the fact that it is current Federal public policy not to prosecute offenders who possess, grow, process, or sell cannabis in a state that purports to permit it.
My question is from the other direction. Does a US state have authority to ban, either civilly or criminally, a drug that is approved by the FDA and legal under Federal law? I know that some states have banned substances such as K2 or kratom that are legal under Federal law (due to not being considered Controlled Substances or otherwise specifically banned pursuant to Federal law) but not approved by the FDA, but I'm asking about a drug that has gone through the full FDA approval cycle and been accepted as an FDA-approved drug for a legitimate medical purpose. Can a US state ban it? For example, could Massachusetts pass a law making possession (even with a prescription) of amoxicillin a felony, or could New Jersey pass a law that any pharmacist caught dispensing semaglutide (even with a prescription) will have their license revoked for violating the New Jersey Semaglutide Ban Act of 2024?
Just to be clear, I'm not asking about why a state would want to ban a drug that has been approved by the FDA or attempting to start at debate on a specific drug, I'm only asking if FDA approval of a drug trumps a state's authority to regulate it further.
