This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19377660#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
US court blocks graphic cigarette warnings | US court blocks graphic cigarette warnings |
(about 9 hours later) | |
The US government cannot force tobacco firms to put large graphic health warnings on cigarette packages, an appeals court in Washington has ruled. | The US government cannot force tobacco firms to put large graphic health warnings on cigarette packages, an appeals court in Washington has ruled. |
It said the government's plan undermined free speech in America. | It said the government's plan undermined free speech in America. |
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had wanted to put nine pictures of dead and diseased smokers to convey the dangers of cigarettes. | The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had wanted to put nine pictures of dead and diseased smokers to convey the dangers of cigarettes. |
But tobacco firms had argued that the images went beyond factual information and into anti-smoking advocacy. | But tobacco firms had argued that the images went beyond factual information and into anti-smoking advocacy. |
The ruling comes as a number of other countries have ordered similar pictures to be placed on all cigarette packets. | The ruling comes as a number of other countries have ordered similar pictures to be placed on all cigarette packets. |
Australia has gone a step further, banning even tobacco company logos from the cartons. | Australia has gone a step further, banning even tobacco company logos from the cartons. |
'Significant vindication' | 'Significant vindication' |
The US Court of Appeals affirmed an earlier lower court ruling in a 2-1 decision. | The US Court of Appeals affirmed an earlier lower court ruling in a 2-1 decision. |
It said the case raised "novel questions about the scope of the government's authority to force the manufacturer of a product to go beyond making purely factual and accurate commercial disclosures and undermine its own economic interest". | It said the case raised "novel questions about the scope of the government's authority to force the manufacturer of a product to go beyond making purely factual and accurate commercial disclosures and undermine its own economic interest". |
The court said that in this case it was "by making every single pack of cigarettes in the country a mini billboard for the government's anti-smoking message". | The court said that in this case it was "by making every single pack of cigarettes in the country a mini billboard for the government's anti-smoking message". |
It added that the FDA "has not provided a shred of evidence" that the images would directly advance its policy aimed at reducing the number of smokers in America. | It added that the FDA "has not provided a shred of evidence" that the images would directly advance its policy aimed at reducing the number of smokers in America. |
The verdict was welcomed by tobacco companies, with Lorrilard Tobacco's describing it as "a significant vindication of First Amendment principles". | The verdict was welcomed by tobacco companies, with Lorrilard Tobacco's describing it as "a significant vindication of First Amendment principles". |
The FDA has so far made no public comment on whether it intends to appeal against the ruling in the US Supreme Court. | The FDA has so far made no public comment on whether it intends to appeal against the ruling in the US Supreme Court. |
Previous version
1
Next version