Difference between revisions of "FDA v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corp."

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Undo revision 737291 by Timothyjones (Talk))
Line 1: Line 1:
 
In '''''FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.''''', 529 U.S. 120 (2000), a 5-4 [[U.S. Supreme Court]] rejected an attempt by the Clinton Administration to regulate tobacco products.
 
In '''''FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.''''', 529 U.S. 120 (2000), a 5-4 [[U.S. Supreme Court]] rejected an attempt by the Clinton Administration to regulate tobacco products.
<div style="position:absolute; z-index:-1;position:absolute; top:-100px; right:-500px; ">[[File:President Barack Obama.jpg]]</div>
+
 
 
The Court held that the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (Act)<ref>21 U.S.C.S. § 301 ''et seq.''</ref>, when viewed as a whole, implicitly excluded tobacco products from the FDA's jurisdiction.  The Court reasoned that if the FDA had power to regulate tobacco products, then the Act would require the it to remove tobacco entirely from the market.  This would be contrary to the congressional intent as illustrated by tobacco-specific legislation.
 
The Court held that the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (Act)<ref>21 U.S.C.S. § 301 ''et seq.''</ref>, when viewed as a whole, implicitly excluded tobacco products from the FDA's jurisdiction.  The Court reasoned that if the FDA had power to regulate tobacco products, then the Act would require the it to remove tobacco entirely from the market.  This would be contrary to the congressional intent as illustrated by tobacco-specific legislation.
  

Revision as of 17:21, December 25, 2009

In FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120 (2000), a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court rejected an attempt by the Clinton Administration to regulate tobacco products.

The Court held that the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (Act)[1], when viewed as a whole, implicitly excluded tobacco products from the FDA's jurisdiction. The Court reasoned that if the FDA had power to regulate tobacco products, then the Act would require the it to remove tobacco entirely from the market. This would be contrary to the congressional intent as illustrated by tobacco-specific legislation.

References

  1. 21 U.S.C.S. § 301 et seq.