Cigarette makers, FDA clash over new graphic ads

[The Straight Story]

Cigarette makers, FDA clash over new graphic ads

The tobacco industry asked Judge Richard Leon on Wednesday for a temporary injunction to block the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's requirement for the labels, pending a final decision on whether the labels are constitutional.

The Obama administration argued, however, that the companies would not suffer irreparable harm without a preliminary injunction.

...

The industry says the new graphic warnings, due to go into effect by September 2012, force them to "engage in anti-smoking advocacy" on the government's behalf.

"Never before has the government required the maker of a lawful product to tell consumers not to buy it," said Noel Francisco, a lawyer arguing on behalf of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

"The government can tell people how to live," said Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment specialist also representing the tobacco industry. "But they can't force people who sell tobacco to be their mouthpieces."

http://www.mnn.com/health/fitness-well-being/stories/cigarette-makers-fda-clash-over-new-graphic-ads

[valerief]

1. If they win this, abortion clinics should be able to NOT do mandatory ultrasounds, too. nt

[Cool Logic]

2. I think most everyone knows about the dangers of cigarettes...

and there is a message on each package warning smokers that the product contained herein will kill you.

This is a good example of an out-of-control regulatory agency whose regulatory aspirations knows no bounds.

[johnaries]

3. Useless regulation - cigarette cases are cheap. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. We are just catching up to OTHER countries

were sales actually went down... this is why they are fighting them.

[War Horse]

5. True, this is the standard in a huge part of the world /nt