Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/07/2008 11:14:20 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


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.


2 posted on 11/07/2008 11:17:56 AM PST by irishjuggler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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.
5 posted on 11/07/2008 11:30:36 AM PST by Question Liberal Authority (My Success Is Not Determined By Who Wins Elections)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson