Introduction to the New Law

The current event of this blog is the lawsuits that were filed against the new cigarette law that President Obama signed in June of 2009. On August 31st, several cigarette companies filed lawsuits against the new tobacco act. This act was called The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Two of the three largest tobacco companies in the U.S, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co and Lorillard Inc. filed suit against the Family Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. These law suits were filed in the tobacco friendly state of Kentucky in the town of Bowling Green. The other major state this law suits were filed in were Virginia, in the city of Richmond. These companies said they are not trying to stop the regulation of the FDA, but lessen the restrictions that control their rights to communicate with their consumers. This new law was created to reduce the number of teenage smokers and stop the advertisement to teens. These companies believed that many parts of this law took away their rights granted to them by the first amendment. Some of the requirements of this law will be needed to be complete by June 22nd of 2010. The new law gives the FDA authority over the tobacco industry for the first time and allows the agency the power to reduce nicotine in tobacco products, ban candy flavorings and block labels such "low tar" and "light”. The labels, such as low tar or light on these products imply that these items are healthy. Tobacco companies also must put large graphic warnings over any carton images that display the harmful and hazardous effects of smoking. The controversial issue of this event is if The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act take away the first amendment of the cigarette companies. This new law has created many different and debatable views of those for and against cigarettes. The companies that have filed suit are said to believe that this law takes away their first amendment. These companies are arguing that the first amendment gives them the right to advertise and communicate information about their product and that their customers have the right to see this information. They believe that before this law, their rights were already limited and what rights they have left are becoming even slimmer. The disagreement with this statement is that these cigarette companies have exceeded their rights by the first amendment. Not all major cigarette companies filed suit against this new law. Companies such as Altria Group Inc, maker of Marlboro, supported this new law. A spokesman for this company has said they will continue to work with the FDR and support them. I found a lot of information in my researching that I did not know before. My answer to my research question was no from the beginning, but as I researched more, I came to more reasons why I supported this law. In one of my books that I used, I found out that R.J Reynolds, one company that filed suit, had been targeting teens for more than a decade. The trend that I keep experiencing throughout my research that majority of the U.S supported this new law and believed these companies’ rights should have been taken away. Another trend that I found was that there were previous bills, before the current law, that were placed upon the companies, but until now they managed to find a way around the regulations. Overall, I found more supporters of this bill than I found of those who disclaimed it. People seem to be more concerned with the public health of the nation and of the children rather than the rights of the cigarette companies. Many of the options I used came from the direct source itself, so it was commonsense on their option. Sources such as the FDA website and the tobacco-free children website were dead give-a ways on what their point of views were. Writers for the FDA website could not say they did not support this law because the FDA is whom gained power over the tobacco industry which was a goal that had tried to achieve over several decades. The last trend that I saw was that current cigarette smokers even supported this new law. They have learned how addicting cigarettes are and how hard it is to stop through their experience and they do not want teens to acquire this nasty habit. The common point of view I continued to see was an overall acceptance to this new law, despite a few that disapproved.