修正案
公共卫生
第一修正案
政治学
法学
医学
最高法院
病理
出处
期刊:JAMA health forum
[American Medical Association]
日期:2021-09-24
卷期号:2 (9): e212886-e212886
被引量:7
标识
DOI:10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.2886
摘要
Importance The 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act required the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to issue a rule requiring graphic warning labels depicting the health consequences of smoking for prominent placement on cigarette packages and advertising. The tobacco industry filed a lawsuit against the FDA claiming that the required graphic labels constituted compelled speech in violation of First Amendment speech rights, and courts ruled for the tobacco industry. Subsequently, the FDA thoroughly redesigned the graphic labels and issued a revised rule, but the tobacco industry immediately filed a similar lawsuit against the FDA again on First Amendment grounds. Observations This article examines the delicate balance between First Amendment speech rights vs the right of the public to receive truthful, accurate, and understandable public health information. The article argues that the newly designed warning labels should easily pass First Amendment analysis. The need for new warning labels on tobacco products and advertising is a critical public health intervention to promote greater public understanding of the negative consequences of cigarette smoking, especially among the young. Conclusions and Relevance The legal analysis in this article marshals arguments that the First Amendment does not prohibit the requirement of the new tobacco warning labels. Commercial speech receives First Amendment protection primarily for the benefit of the public (listeners) and not the tobacco industry (compelled speakers). The balance favors the right of the public to receive accurate information about critical health risks.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI