Federal appeals court blocks San Francisco law requiring health warnings on ads for sugary drinks News
igorovsyannykov / Pixabay
Federal appeals court blocks San Francisco law requiring health warnings on ads for sugary drinks

The US Court Of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a San Francisco law requiring health warnings on advertisements for soda and other sweetened drinks is an violation of the First Amendment.

The suit, which was led by the American Beverage Association (ABA), was first filed in 2015 to contest the “burdensome disclosure requirement” they argued the ordinance advocated.

The law, which was passed in 2015, was part of San Francisco’s initiative to reduce childhood obesity. In addition to the mandatory warnings, the law stipulated the size of the warning label be must be large enough to occupy at least 20 percent of the advertising space. The law was immediately met with backlash from the beverage industry, citing constitutional violations of their commercial free speech

Originally, the ABA sought a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the advertisement requirement. The district court dismissed the ABA’s claim, citing the factors of the preliminary injunction test had not been met. However, the appeals court reversed and remanded the district court ruling and implemented the original requested injunction.

In its opinion, the appeals court specifically cited the 20 percent size requirement of the warning as the reason for their decision. Specifically, this size requirement would impose an unjustified burden to the freedom of speech, and was thereby an unconstitutional infringement upon beverage manufacturers.