After reading the case brief and other material, I understand that the Supreme Court’s decision case shows that the preemption power of congress is to set up the laws at the states that has made to protect the public. In this paper I will be discussing the rules that effect all the states and people’s rights. Another matter that I will be discussing is reviewing the congress decisions about preempting state law for the tobacco industries which the government has supreme rule over the land which in this case protects all tobacco industries. Federal laws are rules by the Supreme Court whichever rules the start when the laws become conflicted.
In the case of Cipollone verses liggett Group. Inc. it is defined that the Supreme Court’s language and result of the preemption power of congress is very narrow. The reason for this case was to show that the state law and the federal law was conflicted by advertising and marketing techniques for the tobacco industry which holds true today. Federal law is superior when it conflicts with state. The reason why the window is narrow in this case because it conflicts with the language used by the statute that directly states the requirements and regulations which was not a direct statement. However, the state law should be preempted if it does conflict with federal law.
The Supreme Court ruling does not bar any resident from New Jersey or any other state, from bringing a law suit against the tobacco companies which are not informing the public resulting of hazards and health safety on each and every pack and carton of cigarettes. For example: my boss owns a bar which he sells alcohol in his establishment to patrons. In his bar he must have warning signs that are visible to the consumer which reads drink responsible and other saying drink don’t drive, also on all alcohol bottle it is visible on all labels that when consumed it might be hazardous and
state health issues and safety. However, when our bar is advertised the owner the bar is not liable to claim preemption when he advertises or promotes, therefore customers and or patrons can’t sue the owner because he doesn’t promote alcohol products he is advertising entertainment, tobacco does promote smoking and try to entice the consumer without the warnings.
I would like se congress in the near future pass a law without confliction that all products consumed or used being promoted by any type of advertisement know edging the public of all warnings regarding their products, I feel it would prevent health problems, safety of injuries and preserve life. For example: if our bar where I work past these advertising laws then the public would be more conscientious regarding alcoholism and when drinking and driving and knowing you have to be accountable for your actions like going to jail or killing some in a car accident. Overall talking about all product and warning of hazards and health safety this situation of tobacco companies is not a government law it is a common law. If the tobacco companies were presented in this situation the courts would likely rate against and up hold the law as constitutional using the rational basis category as long as the government provides evidence that the law showed some legitimate government objective which would include consumer’s protection.
In conclusion to public knows that smoking is harmful to your health but there is no restrictions to advertising making their product enticing to the public to encourage them to smoking or keep smoking. This benefits our country to help pay taxes, raises revenue. This also benefits the health care systems and our health care provides. The government also benefits by keeping of our population at a balance for the economy, but just not lashing out regarding tobacco industry this pertains to all industries across the country the promote health safety and hazards to our society. All industries are protected by the state and federal law which cover the three branches which include legislative, executive and judicial. You can override state laws with federal laws in most cases but there are so many laws that you can cross over the broader causing to law suits.
Melvin, S. P. (2011). The legal environment of business: A managerial approach: Theory to practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin