FDA

New York Times editorial calls tobacco industry First Amendment appeal ‘bogus’

A New York Times’ editorial says a recent effort to required the tobacco industry to include graphic images on cigarette packs should be supported in federal court. The industry claims the images including one with smoke coming out of a tracheotomy hole constitute compelled speech in violation of the industry’s free speech rights. -db From an editorial in The New York Times, April 9, 2012. Full editorial  

Read More »

Federal appeals court deals tobacco a setback on graphic cigarette warnings

The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the government could require the tobacco industry to put graphic warnings on cigarette packs reversing a lower court finding. The appeals court found that the graphic images presented facts that had been verified through scientific studies. -db From the Jurist, March 20, 2012, by Julia Zebley. Full story  

Read More »

Obama adminisration appeals adverse ruling on cigarette pack labeling

In response to a federal judge’s ruling that the Food and Drug Administration could not require tobacco companies to put shocking images on cigarette packs reflecting the ill health effects of smoking, the Obama administration is appealing the ruling. The federal judge said the graphic images constituted forced speech in violation of the First Amendment. -db From Reuters, March 5, 2012, by Jeremy Pelofsky. Full story  

Read More »

Feds can’t force tobacco companies to put negative images on cigarettes

A federal district judge said  the Food and Drug Administration cannot make tobacco companies put images of dead bodies and blackened lungs on their cigarette packages. The companies claimed that the requirement was forced speech and unconstitutional. -db From the Courthouse News Service, November 9, 2011, by Ryan Abbott. Full story  

Read More »

Food and Drug Administration under fire for booting whistleblowers

Six scientists and physician are contending that the Food and Drug Administration retaliated against them for trying to warn Congress that medical devices were readied for approval without adequate safety reviews. Supervisors who disagreed with the whistleblowers approved all the devices. An editorial in The New York Times contended that the FDA managers responsible for such actions as interrupting e-mails to Congress or bringing criminal charges against whistleblowers should be held accountable.  -db From an

Read More »