Daily Journal
Sugar-Sweetened Drinks & The First Amendment
September 29, 2017
From coast to coast, cities have responded to products raising public health concerns with laws that are intended to compel consumers to make different purchasing decisions. These cities' motives, however altruistic, often cannot be squared with the limits of their authority and the constitutional rights of others. New York's attempt to ban the sale of certain high-sugar beverages in excess of 16 ounces was shut down by the courts a few years ago. More recently, San Francisco's effort to require tobacco-style health warnings on billboards and other large-scale outdoor advertising for sugar-sweetened beverages was enjoined from taking effect.
得意分野
Suggested News & Insights
Update on English Legal Advice Privilege Following the Aabar Holdings v Glencore JudgmentMay 20, 2026Sidley Advises Big 12 Conference on Partnership With RedBird Capital PartnersMay 15, 2026Sidley Wins “Innovative Lawyers in Disputes” Award at the FT Innovative Lawyers Awards Asia-Pacific 2026May 14, 2026Sidley Represents Rigel Pharmaceuticals in Exclusive Global License Agreement with Pfizer and Arvinas for VEPPANUMay 13, 2026Sidley Ranked in Benchmark Litigation Asia-Pacific 2026May 13, 2026When “The Devil Made Me Do It” Is Not a Defense: Lessons in AI Governance and Organizational Oversight from an SDNY DecisionMay 11, 2026
- Stay Up To DateSubscribe to Sidley Publications
- Follow Sidley on Social MediaSocial Media Directory
