Skip to comments.
Another Setback for Philip Morris in San Francisco
KCBS ^
| Friday, 07 November 2008
Posted on 11/07/2008 11:14:20 AM PST by nickcarraway
Tobacco giant Philip Morris struck out again in its attempts to kill San Francisco's new ban on cigarette sales at pharmacies such as Walgreens and Rite Aid. A federal court judge in Oakland rejected an unusual first amendment argument.
Philip Morris argued that the sales ban effectively kills in-store tobacco advertisements, a violation of free speech. But Judge Claudia Wilken didnt buy it. She said the company could still advertise in any store it liked.
Philip Morris said 20-percent of its San Francisco sales took place at Walgreens and Rite Aid, the two chains affected by the ban.
The first in the nation anti-tobacco policy is expected to go to trial sometime next year.
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: altria; gomo; mo; phillipmorris; sanfrancisco; tobacco
To: nickcarraway
The free speech argument seems a little weak, Walgreens is challenging the ban on equal protection grounds. That would seem to be the better approach, as the city has yet to offer a cogent explanation why Safeway and Costco, which also have in-store pharmacies, are exempt from the ban.
To: nickcarraway
What is the deal in San Francisco: Walgreens and Rite Aid cannot sell cigarettes anymore?
3
posted on
11/07/2008 11:28:17 AM PST
by
stripes1776
("That if gold rust, what shall iron do?" --Chaucer)
To: nickcarraway
They should just stop selling in San Francisco altogether. Let the Mayor deal with the huge, collective nicotine fit!
4
posted on
11/07/2008 11:29:10 AM PST
by
gridlock
(A member of the Loyal Opposition since 11/4/08)
To: nickcarraway
The free speech argument doesn't sound right. By that logic, Walgreens should sell black tar heroin because the product logo for the heroin would be protected free speech.
If they're determined to go with the free speech argument, they should put gay porn on the cigarette box. Then, selling the cigarettes in San Francisco would not only be protected free speech, but also mandatory.
To: gridlock
And a huge loss of tax revenue! I say go for it!
To: Question Liberal Authority
“they should put gay porn on the cigarette box. Then, selling the cigarettes in San Francisco would not only be protected free speech, but also mandatory.”
lol that’s the funniest thing I read today. Thanks for making my day!
7
posted on
11/07/2008 12:10:56 PM PST
by
BamaGirl
(If I give Obama 76 cents will he stop clamoring for change?)
To: stripes1776
Boston is going to try the same thing here. Not only that but force cigar bars / hookha bars to close. This is not a bill or referendum but the work of the Boston Pubic Heath Commission. Apparently, all they have to do is sign a piece of paper and these businesses will be closed down within five years. Granted, the state is going broke and these smoking bars pay a heavy sum in state taxes, but hey, its for the children - right? Madness.
8
posted on
11/07/2008 12:23:50 PM PST
by
warsaw44
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson