 |
  |
 |
|
| Send FReepmail if you want on/off SVP list | |
| The List of Ping Lists | |
'Frisco outlawing speech as conduct. Right.
Posted on 10/09/2008 3:22:07 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Lawyers for the city of San Francisco told a federal judge Thursday that the city's ban on cigarette sales by pharmacies has nothing to do with free speech.
Attorneys for the city made the argument in a brief filed with U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland to oppose a bid by Philip Morris USA Inc. for a preliminary injunction blocking the ban.
Philip Morris, the nation's largest tobacco company, claims the ban violates its First Amendment right of free speech by putting an end to cigarette advertising and displays in the pharmacy stores.
But city lawyers wrote in their brief, "The sale of a product is conduct, not speech."
They said Philip Morris is still free to pay pharmacies to display tobacco advertisements.
Wilken will hold a hearing in Oakland on Oct. 30 on the tobacco company's request for a preliminary injunction.
Last month, she declined to grant a temporary restraining order that would have blocked the ban from going into effect on Oct. 1.
A San Francisco Superior Court judge also refused to suspend the ordinance in a separate lawsuit filed by Walgreen Co., and the measure took effect as scheduled.
Lawyers from the office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera argued in today's filing that Philip Morris' free speech claim shows "no respect for the Constitution (and) no respect for the power of cities to protect the health of their citizens."
The brief contends that if the measure "can prevent just a few young people from taking up smoking, becoming addicted to nicotine, and developing cancer, that would greatly outweigh any minimal, speculative financial loss that might be incurred by the tobacco industry."
Philip Morris argued in its Sept. 25 lawsuit that the purpose and effect of the ordinance is "to suppress communications directed to adult smokers" in violation of the company's free-speech right.
Just more San Freakcisco oppressive socialism. They tried it with firearms and the Second Amendment, now they are trying on the First Amendment.
Such a pathetic liberal/commie dung heap.
“The sale of a product is conduct, not speech”
Advertising is not a “sale,” you fools. If it was, no company that advertises could ever go bankrupt.
We have laws against smoking in bars and restaurants here in Minnesota, and I’d be willing to take the case to the Supreme Court—if I had any legal training—on the grounds that it violates the First Amendment guarantee of peaceable assembly. How can the state stop me from gathering with others to do what is legal for me to do alone, so long as we do not disrupt the peace when we are gathered?
Why don’t the wackos have the guts to outlaw tobacco?
But setting our country's flag on fire is free speech, even if not a word is spoken.
Concepts lurking in the shadows and penumbras, I'm sure.
Ayn Rand had one of her characters say something to the effect that "when governments start fooling with the meaning of words, watch out."
So there you have it: in liberal land there is no such thing as freedom of expression, speech or print. It’s all subject to definition which is interpreted by the powers that be.
San Fran backs Obama and his civil rights grabs too....
Ping
“Advertising is not a ‘sale,’ you fools. If it was, no company that advertises could ever go bankrupt.”
I just reread the article, and I was wrong. The cigarette nazis will still allow the tobacco companies to advertise in pharmacies. In that case, I agree, sales do not constitute speech. But I stand by my call for them to ban tobacco or get off the pot.
Because they're addicted to the outrageous tax revenues from cigarettes, that's why.
“Because they’re addicted to the outrageous tax revenues from cigarettes, that’s why.”
Ah, so they feed their avarice while the lungs of the masses deteriorate? How disgraceful.
Liberals have no shame.
Right. In the liberal mind, only some people have a right to free speech. If speech comes from anyone other than a liberal, it is criminal and must be regulated. After all, some people are more equal than others.
I am not an attorney, so I have a basic question: Is there a constitutional distinction between Free Speech and Commercial Speech (obviously not including public airwaves like TV)?
If not, they cannot ban cigarette advertising.
I am an ex-smoker who sympathizes with the anti-smoking nazis, but strongly believes that our constitutional rights are of paramount importance.
If I were the CEO of XXX Corporation I hope that I would have the balls to stop ALL sales of ALL MY PRODUCTS in the state of California, at least the county and city of San Francisco. Let ‘em stew in their own juices for a while.
Especially, all firearms manufacturers should cease any and all sales to law enforcement agencies in California.
It might hurt for a while but the outcome might be worthwhile.
Opinions?? SSZ
Why any sane person would want to live in that shithole is totally beyond me.
They could get around this in SF by blending a little marijuana into cigarettes and claiming them as “medicinal”. Then the libs would be all for it.
|
|
| |
|
| Send FReepmail if you want on/off SVP list | |
| The List of Ping Lists | |
'Frisco outlawing speech as conduct. Right.
The Baghdad by the Bay chaos of San Fransicko is a hint of what we can ALL expect from an Obama Administration....
For the same reason that they can’t ban someone for being black or whatever.
It all started way back when.
Don’t get me wrong.. I think that keeping someone out of your business just because of their skin color is horrible.
But it should still be a right to do so even if it makes you look like an idiot.
Yup, those in San Francisco use the Exotic Erotic Ball and the Folsom Street Fair as examples of free speech. Live homosexual acts are performed in public on street corners under the watchful eye of SFs finest.
Sometimes an Uzenka is just an Uzenka.
And I'm going to have to keep telling myself that until that horrible image gets out of my head.
Dude, whats with the pic? Its kinda freaky...
Happy Friday!
Wow! The ciggy companies must really be bad if the City of San Fagcisco can fault their respect for the Constitution. ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.