JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE NEWSBURSTDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.


Friday, August 24, 2012

Federal appeals court rejects graphic cigarette label requirement
Max Slater at 12:12 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] Friday that tobacco companies do not need to print graphic warnings of the dangers of smoking on cigarette packages. In a 2-1 decision, the DC Circuit struck down a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [official website] regulation that requires tobacco companies to display graphic images such as a man smoking a cigarette through a hole in his throat. The court held that the FDA's rule on graphic cigarette label warnings exceeded the agency's statutory authority and undermined tobacco companies' economic autonomy:
This case raises 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 ... in this case, by making "every single pack of cigarettes in the country mini billboard" for the government's anti-smoking message.
One judge dissented, arguing that the government has a strong interest in conveying information on cigarette packages to consumers about the health risks of smoking.

In March the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the graphic cigarette label warnings are constitutional. The court decided unanimously that the portions of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) [HR 1256 text] designed to limit the tobacco industry's ability to advertise to children, including a ban on distributing clothing and goods with logos or brand names, as well as sponsorship of cultural, athletic and social events requiring cigarette packaging and advertisements, is a valid restriction of commercial speech. Earlier that month, a judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the FDA regulation recommending warning labels is unconstitutional [JURIST report], issuing a permanent injunction




Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST LEGAL NEWS

 Malaysia authorities seize newspapers, detain opposition activists
12:34 PM ET, May 23

 Member of feminist rock group Pussy Riot denied parole
11:56 AM ET, May 23

 Egypt court acquits police officers accused of killing protester
11:39 AM ET, May 23

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

LATEST FORUM

The War on Terror and the Need for Muslim Support
DOMESTIC
Faisal Kutty
Valparaiso University Law School

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org