R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration
Five tobacco companies challenged regulations issued by the Food and Drug Administration that would have required graphic health warnings on cigarette packages and other advertisements. The tobacco companies claimed that the health warnings violated their right to freedom of expression, because the warnings amounted to compelled speech. The Appellate Court found the graphic warnings violated freedom of expression and rejected the regulations.
The Justice Department subsequently decided against appeal to the Supreme Court. The Food and Drug Administration will redesign the warnings to more closely align with the ruling of the Court of Appeals.
Tobacco companies or front groups may challenge any legislative or regulatory measure that affects their business interests. Unlike public interest litigation, these cases seek to weaken health measures. These cases frequently involve the industry proceeding against the government. For example, a group of restaurant owners challenging a smoke free law as unconstitutional.
Measures to regulate the marketing on tobacco packages. This includes both bans on false, misleading, deceptive packaging, as well as required health warnings on packaging.
(See FCTC Art. 11)
A violation of the right to expression, free speech or similar right to express oneself without limitation or censorship. The industry may claim that a regulation infringes on their right to communicate with customers and the public. Similarly, they may claim that mandated warnings infringe on their freedom to communicate as they desire.
Five tobacco companies challenged regulations issued by the Food and Drug Administration that would have required graphic health warnings on cigarette packages and other advertisements. The tobacco companies claimed that the health warnings violated their right to freedom of expression, because the warnings amounted to compelled speech. The Appellate Court found the graphic warnings violated freedom of expression and rejected the regulations.
The Justice Department subsequently decided against appeal to the Supreme Court. The Food and Drug Administration will redesign the warnings to more closely align with the ruling of the Court of Appeals.