 |
|
The Rehnquist Court and Tobacco—Reply
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In Reply: Dr Lutschg is correct to draw attention to the Supreme Court's role in thwarting public health regulation of tobacco products. My Commentary emphasized the Court's antipathy to public health regulation. The Supreme Court has undermined effective tobacco regulation in 3 ways, holding that (1) the FDA lacks jurisdiction to regulate cigarettes, (2) regulation of tobacco advertising violates the First Amendment, and (3) federal law preempts state tort litigation against the tobacco industry.
As Lutschg points out, the Supreme Court has found that Congress did not authorize the FDA to regulate the tobacco industry, even though smoking remains the leading cause of death in the United States.1 In denying the FDA jurisdiction, the Court invalidated reasonable public health regulation designed to restrict tobacco advertising targeted toward children and adolescents.2
The Supreme Court has also invalidated government regulation of advertising because it violated the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Lawrence O. Gostin, JD, LLD
gostin@law.georgetown.edu
Georgetown University Law Center
Washington, DC
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
The Rehnquist Court and Tobacco
James H. Lutschg
JAMA. 2006;295(11):1250-1251.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Supreme Court’s Influence on Medicine and Health: The Rehnquist Court, 1986-2005
Lawrence O. Gostin
JAMA. 2005;294(13):1685-1687.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
