Headlines Tagged with FDASuit — 412 headlines found
John Dinan, an associate professor of political science at Wake Forest University, expects the U.S. Supreme Court will agree to address the graphic-warning labels, "especially because the lower federal courts are divided on this question."
Aug 25, 2012 Winston-Salem (NC) Journal
added Aug 25, 2012 13:36
A federal appeals court threw out the FDA's attempts to slap graphic warning labels -- such as a pair of lungs blackened by smoke -- on cigarette packs in a decision released Friday.
Aug 24, 2012 MedPage Today
added Aug 25, 2012 13:26
Mealey's Litigation Bulletin Tobacco: Federal Appeals Court Rules that Graphic Warnings Violate Tobacco Companies' Rights
Unlike in Warner-Lambert Co. v. FTC, 562 F.2d 749 (D.C. Cir. 1977), the panel said, the FDA has not shown that the graphic warnings were designed to correct past false or misleading claims or that, absent disclosure, consumers would likely be deceived by
Aug 24, 2012 Lexis Nexis
added Aug 25, 2012 11:39
DC Circuit Affirms District Court: Court of Appeals rules in favor of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and other manufacturers in graphic warnings lawsuit (PDF)
the Court held that the proposed warnings violated the First Amendment because the “FDA has not provided a shred of evidence - much less the substantial evidence required by the APA - showing that the graphic warnings will ‘directly advance’ its interest
Aug 24, 2012 Reynolds American (RAI)
added Aug 24, 2012 16:07
this Court’s logic, the small Surgeon General textual warnings might also violate the cigarette companies’ rights to commercial free speech because there is inadequate scientific proof that those labels reduce smoking rates.
Aug 24, 2012 Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI)
added Aug 24, 2012 15:49
A three-judge panel ruled in a 2-1 decision that the FDA did not present any data to the court that demonstrated the warnings would reduce smoking rates, the agency's stated goal for the initiative.
Aug 24, 2012 Law360
added Aug 24, 2012 15:47
The First Amendment requires the government not only to state a substantial interest justifying a regulation on commercial speech, but also to show that its regulation directly advances that goal. FDA failed to present any data—much less the substantial e
Aug 24, 2012 US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit
added Aug 24, 2012 15:08
The FDA, Judge Brown writes, “offers no evidence showing that such warnings have directly caused a material decrease in smoking rates.”
Aug 24, 2012 Washington Post
added Aug 24, 2012 15:05
Shares of tobacco companies traded higher Friday after a federal appeals court ruled in the industry's favor, blocking the Food and Drug Administration requiring large, graphic health warnings about the risks of smoking on cigarette packages.
Aug 24, 2012 AP - Associated Press
added Aug 24, 2012 15:03
The Justice Department should quickly appeal today's ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that struck down the large, graphic cigarette warnings required by the landmark 2009 law giving the FDA authority over tobacco products. Today's
Aug 24, 2012 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (CTFK)
added Aug 24, 2012 15:02