Buss 200 Administrative Law Essay
The College Of New Jersey
Dr. Laura Sanders
A National Dispute
In the past decade there has been an increased controversial view of tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana. People have been divided on how to regulate these products in the market, causing much governmental controversy. There have been many groundbreaking and unprecedented court cases that have been shaping the public policy on which these substances stand on. These substances have an immediate and perilous effect on the health of all human beings. Tobacco is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, alcohol ...view middle of the document...
The case presented whether a regulation of the New York Public Service Commission violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it completely bans promotional advertising by an electrical utility. (Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S 557 (1980), Cornell Law, Oyez) With the results of this court case there was a Hudson Test that was evolved, The test poses 4 questions; 1) The product is legal and the communication is not misleading? 2) The government has a substantial interest in what it seeks to achieve? 3) The law directly advances the government’s interest(s)? 4) A more limited restriction on commercial speech could not advance the government’s interest? (New England Law)
In response to, Lorillard v. Reilly, 533 U.S. 525 (2001), Congress passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, Pub. L. 111-31, 123 Stat. 1776 (2009), which allows states and other local governments to regulate the time, place, and manner of cigarette promotion. (Control Act, Oyez) The act has many provisions but I believe there are two main points from the act that contribute to the argument that these two points survive the Hudson test which gives the government a right to regulate tobacco due to health concerns. The act says that all levels of government are authorized to enact stricter regulations over actions that encourage youth tobacco use. The test also passes the part in the act that’s states the FDA requires more explicit, prominent, and graphic warnings. According to the Hudson case, the judges held that tobacco advertising and promotion, despite its generally misleading character passes the first test. Government’s substantial interest in protecting the health and safety of their residents, which is the concern with tobacco, passes the second prong, according to Lorillard v. Reilly, 533 U.S. 525 (2001). The third prong is proved because tobacco products display and encourage underage youth to try to buy tobacco products, increase youth tobacco experimentation and initiation, promote impulse purchases, and normalize tobacco use (New England Health). The fourth prong stands because regulation of commercial speech can be an important element to integrate into existing, comprehensive tobacco control measures, and because of this local governments have a significant interest in protecting the health and safety of children by limiting these displays. (New England Health, Lorillard v. Reilly, 533 U.S. 525 (2001)). Both of these statutes from the act pass the Hudson test and therefore should be regulated to promote proper health and well being for the citizens. (New England Law, Maitland)
Statistics prove that Tobacco is the number one cause of preventable death in the US, which is an ultimate public health problem. Also, youth are particularly vulnerable to tobacco product promotion, which is why tobacco companies exploit this weakness and target youth. Because of this, tobacco...