A US federal mandate requiring tobacco companies to place graphic images on their products warning of the dangers of smoking was tossed out Wednesday by a judge in Washington, with the judge saying the requirements were a violation of free speech.
"Unfortunately, because Congress did not consider the First Amendment implications of this legislation, it did not concern itself with how the regulations could be narrowly tailored to avoid unintentionally compelling commercial speech," said federal Judge Richard Leon in his 19-page ruling.
A group of tobacco companies led by R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard had sued, saying the warnings would be cost-prohibitive, and would dominate and damage the packaging and promotion of their particular brands. The legal question was whether the new labeling was purely factual and accurate in nature or was designed to discourage use of the products.
"The graphic images here were neither designed to protect the consumer from confusion or deception, nor to increase consumer awareness of smoking risks" said Leon. "Rather they were crafted to evoke a strong emotional response calculated to provoke the viewer to quit or never start smoking."
Lorillard attorney Floyd Abrams applauded the legal opinion. "The government, as the court said, is free to speak for itself, but it may not, except in the rarest circumstance, require others to mouth its position," said Abrams, a prominent First Amendment scholar.
It’s only a question of time before the tobacco companies sue the Gillard government (probably for billions in compensation) over the olive green plain packaging for all tobacco products.
For the record I’m a non-smoker and I loathe cigarettes. People who choose to smoke are doing themselves and their family member’s considerable harm by continuing to smoke. I’m glad it’s banned from most public places and restaurants where food is served. However it is a legal product, just as beer, wine, soft drink and krispy kreme donuts are. Forcing any company without compensation to remove their legal logos, slogans and brand names for a government inscribed slogan on a logo-less bland colour packaging is a dangerous slippery slope. The Bully State works by “nudging” us to “except” change. Olive coloured logo and slogan-less cigarette packs today, brown coloured logo and slogan-less beer cans tomorrow and so on. Bit by bit, our freedom to choose for ourselves is being taken away by the Bully State. If the Bully State can take away the legal right of how a company is allowed to promote its brand and products then what is going to stop the Bully State from taking away your right to speak your mind?
The only way to stop a “bully” is to confront them, so it’s time to stand up and confront the Bully State we now unfortunately live in.
The first of many steps is to repeal section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act.
The IPA has set up a page for you to email Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott and Bob Brown to tell them you value freedom of speech and you expect them to repeal this anti-free speech law.
Thanks to George R for the link.
Non smoker, or should I say ex-smoker.
I hope the Tobacco companies sue the ass off the Australian government for the simple reason that it might wake up a few Australians to what sort of government we have.
After giving up smoking about 15 years ago(having smoked for 30 years)I can support the fact that the body can recover immensely after many years of abuse.Having always been an active person , I took up cycling to fend off the smoking addiction.And now have enjoyed 15 years of cycling , hiking , working , and breathing freely.
A marvelous change to the quality of life .
I'm now an anti-smoking advocate, but respect the right for those who wish to smoke , their choice to do so .
The Australian people need to made aware of what this government is up to , and every nail in the coffin of the Labor party, is another point toward their demise.
These people are not leading the country, they are ripping off the country for their own benefit.
Posted by: barry | March 2, 2012 at 07:03 AM
Um, guess what, we don't have the same level of Freedom of speech written into our constitution. Your living in a different world if you believe the same will occur here. Another point, on this is that public opinion is with the government.
Posted by: Robert | March 2, 2012 at 09:45 AM
You're absolutely right Robert. Public opinion is indeed with the government on this. The majority don't smoke and find the stink offensive. Being a reformed smoker, you probably now know when you're standing next to a smoker. They smell like ashtrays.
And pay big money to aquire that odour.
Posted by: budgie smuggler | March 2, 2012 at 12:18 PM
and you both (robert & BS) miss the point. What's the next item the government doesn't like and will ban? Beer? Coke? or your free speech.
quote
Lorillard attorney Floyd Abrams applauded the legal opinion. "The government, as the court said, is free to speak for itself, but it may not, except in the rarest circumstance, require others to mouth its position," said Abrams, a prominent First Amendment scholar.
end quote
I suggest you two roosters stop and thing about what Abrams said. Same applies here. we however don't have a 1st amendment right so we're screwed
Posted by: Andy Semple | March 2, 2012 at 02:13 PM
So, marijuana should be decrimintalised Andy?
Posted by: budgie smuggler | March 2, 2012 at 03:39 PM