FDA's graphic cigarette warning labels: Beyond free speech?

FDA

(CBS/AP)The FDA's plan to force tobacco companies to slap gruesome images on its cigarette packages is on hold, thanks to a judge who blocked the new federal requirement on Monday.

PICTURES: World's most gruesome tobacco warning labels

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled in Washington on Monday that it's likely Big Tobacco will succeed in a lawsuit to block the new warning labels, so he stopped the requirement until after the lawsuit is resolved. That could take years.

The cigarette makers that sued the FDA are R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Lorillard Tobacco Co., Commonwealth Brands Inc., Liggett Group, and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. They say their products have had medical warnings for more than 45 years, adding they have never filed a legal challenge against them until the new images were approved. A similar case is also pending before the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.

Leon found the nine graphic images approved by the FDA in June go beyond conveying the facts about smoking's health risks and veer into advocacy - a critical distinction in free speech cases.

PICTURES: Yikes! Gruesome new tobacco warning labels from Canada

The proposed packaging would include graphic depictions of a man exhaling cigarette smoke through a tracheotomy hole in his throat, a diseased mouth covered with lesions, and a cadaver on a table with post-autopsy chest staple.

Those labels can be found here.

"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," Leon wrote in his 29-page opinion.

Leon pointed out some photos used in the labels were altered to evoke emotion. He also said the FDA requirement that labels were to cover the entire top half of cigarette packs, front and back and include a number for a stop-smoking hotline, may be unconstitutional. Leon said the labels would amount to a "mini-billboard" for the agency's "obvious anti-smoking agenda."

The ruling is "wrong on the science and wrong on the law," said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. He urged the Obama administration to appeal the ruling and said a delay would only serve the financial interests of tobacco companies that spend billions to downplay the health risks of smoking.

"Studies around the world and evidence presented to the FDA have repeatedly shown that large, graphic warnings, like those adopted by the FDA, are most effective at informing consumers about the health risks of smoking, discouraging children and other nonsmokers from starting to smoke, and motivating smokers to quit," Myers said in a statement. "Because of that evidence, at least 43 other countries now require large, graphic cigarette warnings."

Tell us what you think: Did the FDA overstep its bounds with its new tobacco warning labels?

Click here to check out gruesome tobacco warning labels from around the world.

55 Photos

55 gruesome tobacco warning labels

[bigots]

Any questions on WHAT'S killing PEOPLE ?

It's Not Cigarettes That's for SURE

[bigots]

And in the meantime,The Biggest cause of death and disease not only to the ALCOHOL users world wide get off scott free.Alcohol Kills others,more than a billion Cigarettes have killed any smoker on this earth,Beer and Hard liquor pay pennies in Taxes,and can be had anywhere,and anywhere children are present,Just in the USA it's use costs $ 280 Billion a year,smoking dont even come close cost wise,and on an ALCOHOL LABEL IT SAYS THIS "ALcohol impairs your ability drive a vehicle,May cause Birth defects in pregnant women,AND MAY Cause health Problems,but nothing about will kill others,cause suicides,rapes,murders,and BEAT YOUR SPOUSES,And Cause 45 Different Diseases to the human BODY...GO FIGURE

[maruawe]

The FDA should not demand that these pictures be put on product packages, they have warning labels of sufficient size to deter first time smokers and the new graphics exceed the
size of FDA labeling that is lawfully required. This type of graphic will be seen by small children and young adults who should not be subjected to this type of graphic.
and I believe that it will defeat the purpose of the pictures. and as a graphic artist I do not believe it will help one iota. There will be young adults that will start collecting just to get the pictures , SO there goes the deterrent affect for this type of graphic

[Jesse_engAmer]

I do not smoke nor have I ever smoked but labeling is a form of advertising, which is considered commercial speech and is thus constitutionally protected. Second, cigarettes boxes are not deceptive and lastly, the FDA has soared past being "no more restrictive of speech than necessary" right into unnecessarily exceedingly restrictive by mandating half of every carton's design to the creative control of the government. This is beyond question a case of FDA over-reach. Apply the Central Hudson Test. What do you think? http://eng.am/vu0m7f

[DarkMatter47]

i agree with the judge. I have never smoked, no one i know has ever smoked, I think it is a dirty practice but, it is not right to force a business to advertize against their product. You might as well make smoking illegal (not a bad idea) if you do this.

[anotherword]

at what point do we become adults that can think for ourselves and CHOOSE what we consume for ourselves? big brother acting like a mother is not what this country was founded upon.