Court Blocks Graphic Cigarette Warnings
In a rare victory for the tobacco industry, a U.S. appeals court has ruled against the Food and Drug Administration’s requirement that cigarette manufacturers adorn their products with pictures of dead and diseased smokers, saying the mandate constituted a violation of free speech.
In a rare victory for the tobacco industry, a U.S. appeals court has ruled against the Food and Drug Administration’s requirement that cigarette manufacturers adorn their products with pictures of dead and diseased smokers, saying the mandate constituted a violation of free speech.
The tobacco industry argued that the images strayed beyond the facts of the dangers of smoking and into the realm of advocacy. Presumably, cigarette companies will still be required to place written warnings on their products.
— Posted by Alexander Reed Kelly.
WAIT BEFORE YOU GO...BBC:
[The court] said the case raised “novel questions about the scope of the government’s authority to force the manufacturer of a product to go beyond making purely factual and accurate commercial disclosures and undermine its own economic interest”.
The court said that in this case it was “by making every single pack of cigarettes in the country a mini billboard for the government’s anti-smoking message”.
It added that the FDA “has not provided a shred of evidence” that the images would directly advance its policy aimed at reducing the number of smokers in America.
This year, the ground feels uncertain — facts are buried and those in power are working to keep them hidden. Now more than ever, independent journalism must go beneath the surface.
At Truthdig, we don’t just report what's happening — we investigate how and why. We follow the threads others leave behind and uncover the forces shaping our future.
Your tax-deductible donation fuels journalism that asks harder questions and digs where others won’t.
Don’t settle for surface-level coverage.
Unearth what matters. Help dig deeper.
Donate now.
"We're one stop closer to holding him accountable," said advocacy group Tax March.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sides with a lower court, saying that reinstating the ban—even temporarily—would cause harm.
Now that gays and lesbians have Supreme Court backing to get married, it's getting harder for wedding-industry workers like Jack Phillips, owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop in Denver, to refuse to do business with same-sex couples.
A streak of victories for activists fighting to extend gay rights across the country came to an end Thursday when an appeals court upheld same-sex marriage bans in four states and made a Supreme Court battle on the issue likely.
A federal appeals court in Manhattan became the second court to find that the Defense of Marriage Act -- the law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman -- is unconstitutional.
An appeals court Tuesday extended a temporary stay of a judge's order prohibiting the Obama administration's controversial efforts to put any U.S. citizen the government deems a terrorism suspect behind bars indefinitely without being charged or tried.An appeals court extends the stay of a judge's order blocking the provision.
You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.