The new FDA-mandated cigarette caution product labels have been under litigation for years. Today, a Washington D.C. judge released a temporary injunction. The ruling signifies that until a final constitutional ruling has been released, cigarette manufacturers will not be required to put the visual images on packs of cigarettes. Source for this article: Tobacco warning labels may unconstitutionally compel speech

Caution on the package

All packages of cigarettes would have had to have warning labels to them starting on Sept 22, 2012. These were mandated by the FDA. With this requirement, 20 percent of print ads would have had to have at least one of the graphic images. They also had to be displayed on over 50 percent of cigarette packs. There were many things included in the images. This involved mouth cancer, a mother expelling smoke into a baby’s face, and diseased lungs. The goal of the warning labels is to graphically illustrate the outcomes of smoking in an effort to lower smoking rates.

Tobacco companies call it compelled speech

In a lawsuit filed in federal court, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Lorillard Tobacco Co., Commonwealth Brands Inc. Liggett Group and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. claimed that the FDA’s brand new needs constituted compelled speech. Occasionally people have to say things they do not agree with. When it is required, it is compelled speech. Compelled speech is under the First Amendment. Individuals are protected from it. In 43 nations, large, visual warnings comparable to the ones the FDA wants to require are already showcased on cigarette packs. These warnings are required in Canada.

A question of facts

The judge does not think the requirements are “purely factual and uncontroversial disclosures,” which is why there has been an injunction against the requirement began. The judge really doesn’t believe the graphics are factual. That makes them unnecessary.

“It is abundantly clear from viewing these images that the emotional response they were crafted to induce is calculated to provoke the viewer to quit or never to start smoking - an objective wholly apart from disseminating purely factual and uncontroversial information,” wrote the judge in his opinion.

Articles cited:
- Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/07/fda-tobacco-idUSN1E7A612N20111107
- USA Today: http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2011-11-07/Judge-blocks-graphic-images-on-cigarette-packages/51108576/1
- Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-07/tobacco-health-warning-labels-blocked-by-u-s-judge-on-free-speech-grounds.html
- First Amendment Center: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/graphic-images-for-cigarette-labels-put-on-hold