We have come a long way since the days of Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man, but it appears that anti-tobacco momentum may be slowing down in the United States. Thanks to a federal judge’s interpretation of the First Amendment, it may have even hit a constitutional dead-end.
On Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon blocked new Food and Drug Administration requirements for tobacco companies to put graphic warning labels on cigarette packages, including images of corpses and diseased lungs, by next September, according to the Associated Press.
“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,” Judge Leon wrote.
Wait — isn’t that what the government is supposed to do? After all, similar images have already begun popping up on cigarette packs around the world — in at least 43 countries, according to Time. So what’s the problem?
It turns out there is a fine line between informing the public that a product is unhealthy or dangerous and actively advocating for them not to use it.
With the new images put forth by the FDA, the government overplayed its hand in this case.
As Judge Leon wrote, the graphic pictures represent “an objective wholly apart from disseminating purely factual and uncontroversial information,” and instead advocate anti-smoking messages.
This may seem like a petty distinction, but it actually violates the tobacco companies’ First Amendment free speech rights, by compelling them to essentially act as “mini-billboards” for the clearly partial FDA campaign.
Floyd Abrams, the lawyer who argued on behalf of the tobacco companies, explained that while it isn’t unconstitutional for the government to require warnings on cigarette packages, “the warnings must be factual and uncontroversial in nature,” according to The New York Times.
Now many anti-tobacco activists are calling on the U.S. Justice Department to immediately appeal the decision, and some expect the case to end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.
But maybe instead of the typical knee-jerk reaction frequently seen in court, they should review they’re own arguments before stepping back up to the ring.
True, tobacco companies aren’t exactly the friendliest or most heroic characters in the media. But they aren’t evil villains either, and they have constitutional rights as well. And more importantly, the public has the ability and the right to choose how to conduct its lifestyles. The government should put responsibility back into the hands of individual citizens.
We’re not talking about advertising to children. We’re adults. The product is legal. And unless you are illiterate and live in complete isolation from society, then we are well aware of the dangers that smoking cigarettes pose.
These are all good things — and hopefully the number of people who decide to smoke will continue to shrink over time.
Now the government should either propose to ban tobacco products altogether, or let those who choose to smoke — in spite of the health risks, taxes and social stigma — to do so in peace.
Reach the columnist at djoconn1@asu.edu
Click here to subscribe to the daily State Press newsletter.
