Judge Orders the FAA to Explain its Ban on Remeron | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-06.23.25

Airborne-NextGen-06.24.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.25.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-06.26.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.27.25

Tue, Jul 01, 2025

Judge Orders the FAA to Explain its Ban on Remeron

Former Airline Pilot Comes Forward After Being Denied a Medical

A D.C. Circuit Judge is ordering the FAA to explain itself after a former airline pilot was denied a medical without receiving any true rationale for the decision. The disqualifying medication, Remeron, seems to carry the same drowsiness-related risks as other antidepressants that the agency takes on a case-by-case basis.

At the center of the case is Michael Solondz: a veteran airline pilot with nearly 20 years of commercial flying experience. After stepping away from the cockpit due to anxiety, Solondz tried Lexapro, an FAA-approved antidepressant, but experienced side effects like dizziness. His doctor switched him to Remeron, which he took at night and tolerated well. When he reapplied for his first-class medical certificate, the FAA denied his request solely based on the use of Remeron, despite Solondz submitting multiple medical evaluations showing no side effects or cognitive impairment.

The FAA’s so-called justification was a single 1998 study suggesting Remeron might impair driving after 16 days of use. Never mind that FAA-approved antidepressants like SSRIs also carry drowsiness risks, yet still earn case-by-case evaluation by regulators. The court, in no uncertain terms, said that the disconnect needs to be addressed.

“The difficulty is that, whereas the Federal Aviation Administration conditionally approved Lexapro, it has categorically disallowed pilots to fly while treated with mirtazapine,” wrote Judge Cornelia Pillard. “The agency must reasonably explain its actions. It has not done so here. The agency has failed to explain why it categorically disallows medical certification to all pilots who take the medication that Solondz was prescribed and finds beneficial.”

The FAA also cited unrelated and inconsistently applied health concerns like sleep apnea and a decades-old atrial fibrillation incident as reasons for denial, raising more questions than answers. The court remanded the case, ordering the FAA to provide a reasoned, evidence-based explanation.

FMI: www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (06.29.25)

Aero Linx: Transport Canada We are a federal institution, leading the Transport Canada portfolio and working with our partners. Transport Canada is responsible for transportation p>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (06.29.25): Gross Navigation Error (GNE)

Gross Navigation Error (GNE) A lateral deviation from a cleared track, normally in excess of 25 Nautical Miles (NM). More stringent standards (for example, 10NM in some parts of th>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: Anticipating Futurespace - Blue Origin Visits Airventure 2017

From AirVenture 2017 (YouTube Edition): Flight-Proven Booster On Display At AirVenture… EAA AirVenture Oshkosh is known primarily as a celebration of experimental and amateu>[...]

NTSB Final Report: Cirrus SR22

Aircraft Parachute System (CAPS) Was Deployed About 293 Ft Above Ground Level, Which Was Too Low To Allow For Full Deployment Of The Parachute System Analysis: The day before the a>[...]

Airborne Affordable Flyers 06.26.25: PA18 Upgrades, ‘Delta Force’, Rhinebeck

Also: 48th Annual Air Race Classic, Hot Air Balloon Fire, FAA v Banning 100LL, Complete Remote Pilot The news Piper PA-18 Super Cub owners have been waiting for has finally arrived>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC