The_RANDy_Corporation
04-26-2001, 12:00 AM
Darth Vader Ginsburg is a national embarrassment and should be impeached. Read this and tell me she doesn't sound more like a legislator than a jurist. I wonder if she is capable of comprehending the difference!
******
Justices Use Ad Dispute to Consider Speech Regulation
By Anne Gearan Associated Press Writer
Published: Apr 25, 2001
WASHINGTON (AP) - Federal curbs on tobacco advertising mean states can't pile on their own additional ad bans, a lawyer for the tobacco industry argued Wednesday.
Tobacco companies want the Supreme Court to throw out proposed tobacco advertising restrictions in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts regulations would pick up where the 1969 federal ban on broadcast ads and the later national end to tobacco billboards left off.
Most of Wednesday's lively oral argument focused on a legal question - whether the 1969 law passed by Congress trumps state efforts to regulate tobacco. If the court ruled for the tobacco companies on that issue it could sidestep a larger free-speech issue.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg challenged tobacco company lawyer Jeffrey Sutton to explain why states should not try additional ways to keep an addictive product - she called it a drug - like tobacco away from children.
"We're dealing with a commodity like no other. This is highly addictive and especially dangerous to children, who can get hooked at age 13 and not get off it for the rest of their lives," Ginsburg said.
To be further embarrassed by Ginsburg's antics, click here. (http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGADDW1BZLC.html)
******
Justices Use Ad Dispute to Consider Speech Regulation
By Anne Gearan Associated Press Writer
Published: Apr 25, 2001
WASHINGTON (AP) - Federal curbs on tobacco advertising mean states can't pile on their own additional ad bans, a lawyer for the tobacco industry argued Wednesday.
Tobacco companies want the Supreme Court to throw out proposed tobacco advertising restrictions in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts regulations would pick up where the 1969 federal ban on broadcast ads and the later national end to tobacco billboards left off.
Most of Wednesday's lively oral argument focused on a legal question - whether the 1969 law passed by Congress trumps state efforts to regulate tobacco. If the court ruled for the tobacco companies on that issue it could sidestep a larger free-speech issue.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg challenged tobacco company lawyer Jeffrey Sutton to explain why states should not try additional ways to keep an addictive product - she called it a drug - like tobacco away from children.
"We're dealing with a commodity like no other. This is highly addictive and especially dangerous to children, who can get hooked at age 13 and not get off it for the rest of their lives," Ginsburg said.
To be further embarrassed by Ginsburg's antics, click here. (http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGADDW1BZLC.html)