Warning labels
Tobacco industry's challenge to law requiring graphic labels is rejected
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a tobacco-industry challenge to a 2009 federal law that requires graphic warning labels on cigarettes and expanded marketing restrictions on tobacco products.
The challengers argued that parts of the law, which gave the Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate tobacco, violated their constitutional free-speech rights. The companies challenging it include R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Lorillard Tobacco Co.
The law mandated that tobacco manufacturers allot half the space on the front and back of cigarette packages for graphic health warnings. It also barred marketing practices such as cigarette-brand sponsorships of sporting or cultural events.
The companies said the provisions burdened their protected right to communicate with adults about their products.
A Cincinnati-based federal appeals court in March 2012 upheld most of the law, citing the government's interest in consumer awareness about the health risks from smoking. The Supreme Court, in a short written order, let that ruling stand, denying the industry appeal without comment.
The FDA said it was pleased with the Supreme Court's decision and would continue "moving forward" to implement the tobacco law.
Still, it could be years before graphic warning labels actually appear on U.S. cigarettes. In August, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the proposed labels violated the tobacco industry's free-speech rights under the First Amendment. The labels included pictures of diseased lungs and dead bodies.
That court said the FDA didn't present any data showing that its specific graphic warnings would accomplish its goal of reducing smoking rates. The Obama administration said last month it wouldn't mount a further legal defense of the labels, leaving the agency to consider new proposals.
Floyd Abrams, an attorney representing Lorillard, said Monday in a statement that "there will obviously be a good deal more litigation to come on this topic." referring to the appeals decision on the labels.
Consumer groups cheered the Supreme Court's action because it keeps much of the federal tobacco law in place and allows the FDA to restart the process of proposing and implementing graphic warning labels on cigarette packages.
"Now that the FDA's ability to require large, graphic warnings on cigarette packs is validated law, we urge the agency to expeditiously develop new graphic warnings," said Chris Hansen, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, in a statement.
The FDA will go through the federal rule-making process required for any new cigarette warnings. It usually takes years for federal rules to be written and implemented. Any new labels could potentially be the subject of additional court challenges.
Cigarette labels in the U.S. haven't been updated in almost 30 years. They contain text-only warnings written on the side of cigarette packages discussing the dangers of smoking.
(Published by The Wall Street Journal – April 22, 2013)