First Amendment topicsAbout the First Amendment
News Story
 
print this   Print

Justices allow lawsuits over 'light' cigarettes

By The Associated Press
12.15.08

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court today handed a surprising defeat to tobacco companies counting on it to put an end to lawsuits alleging deceptive marketing of “light” cigarettes.

In a 5-4 split, high court ruled in Altria Group Inc. v. Good that smokers may use state consumer-protection laws to sue cigarette makers for the way they promote “light” and “low tar” brands.

The decision was at odds with recent anti-consumer rulings that limited state regulation of business in favor of federal power.

The tobacco companies argued that the lawsuits are barred by the federal cigarette-labeling law, which forbids states from regulating any aspect of cigarette advertising that involves smoking and health.

Justice John Paul Stevens, however, said in his majority opinion that the labeling law does not shield the companies from state laws against deceptive practices. The decision forces tobacco companies to defend dozens of suits filed by smokers in Maine, where the case originated, and across the country.

People suing the cigarette makers still must prove that using the terms “light” and “lowered tar” actually violates the state anti-fraud laws, but those lawsuits may go forward, Stevens said.

He was joined by the other liberal justices, Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter, as well as Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose vote often decides cases where there is an ideological division.

The conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, dissented.

Thomas, writing for the dissenters, said the link between the fraud claims and smokers’ health is unmistakable.

But he also said: “The alleged misrepresentation here — that ‘light’ and ‘low-tar’ cigarettes are not as healthy as advertised — is actionable only because of the effect that smoking light and low-tar cigarettes had on respondents’ health.”

Shares of Altria Group Inc. fell 17 cents, or 1.1%, to $15.17 in morning trading today while shares of rival cigarette maker Reynolds American Inc. lost 91 cents, or 2.2%, to $39.64.

Three Maine residents sued Altria Group Inc. and its Philip Morris USA Inc. subsidiary under the state’s law against unfair marketing practices. The class-action claim represents all smokers of Marlboro Lights or Cambridge Lights cigarettes, both made by Philip Morris.

The lawsuit argues that the company knew for decades that smokers of light cigarettes compensate for the lower levels of tar and nicotine by taking longer puffs and compensating in other ways.

A federal district court threw out the lawsuit, but the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it could go forward.


Previous
High court steps into legal fray over 'light' cigarettes
Justices agree to decide if tobacco companies can be sued in state court over alleged deceptive ads. 01.22.08

Related

Justices turn away tobacco companies' appeal about ads

Reynolds American, Lorillard claimed California's tough anti-smoking ads smeared their reputations. 02.21.06

Court blocks landmark ruling against tobacco industry

D.C. Circuit stays federal judge's decision that companies violated racketeering laws; order allows ad campaigns to continue that had been ruled misleading. 11.01.06

Justices turn down smokers' lawsuit
High court denies cert on case in which California Supreme Court agreed with tobacco companies that federal law, First Amendment allowed their marketing campaigns. 03.18.08

Calif. high court revives lawsuit against tobacco industry
Majority orders trial court to reconsider case alleging cigarette advertisements misled consumers. 05.20.09

Tobacco companies lose appeal in landmark case
D.C. Circuit upholds requirements that manufacturers change how they market cigarettes. 05.26.09

Cigarette makers try to extinguish new marketing limits
R.J. Reynolds, Lorillard, others file lawsuit, contending provisions in Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act violate their free-speech rights. 09.01.09

Big tobacco wields First Amendment argument
By Tony Mauro Philip Morris argues in brief to high court that if rulings in prosecution stand, protected speech will be at risk. 02.22.10

2008-09 Supreme Court case tracker

Tobacco ads

News summary page
View the latest news stories throughout the First Amendment Center Online.



Last system update: Friday, April 23, 2010 | 15:41:52
 SEARCH  MORE
About this site
About the First Amendment
About the First Amendment Center
How to contribute
Video/RSS/podcasts
First Amendment programs
State of the First Amendment
reports

Religious liberty in public schools
First Reports
Supreme Court
Columnists
Experts
First Amendment publications
First Amendment Center history
Glossary
Freedom Sings™
Events
First Amendment
Schools

Congressional Research Service reports
Guest editorials
FOI material
The First Amendment
Library

Lesson plans
freedomforum.org
Newseum
Contact us
Privacy statement
Related links