TODAY'S SUPREME COURT DECISION ON LIQUOR ADS AND FREE SPEECH IS UNLIKELY TO AFFECT CIGARETTE AD RESTRICTIONS PROPOSED BY FDA

Today's Supreme Court decision striking down a state ban on the advertising of liquor prices should have no effect on plans by the FDA to restrict cigarette ads directed at kids, says the First Amendment scholar whose legal actions drove cigarette commercials off the air and led to the FDA proposals.

"Preventing adult consumers from purchasing less expensive brands of booze by keeping them in the dark about the lowest prices is fundamentally different from restricting the small class of ads which have a particular impact on kids and have been shown to be a major factor in their choice to start smoking," says law professor John Banzhaf, whom Readers' Digest called "the Man Behind the Ban on Cigarette Commercials."

Banzhaf notes that restrictions far stricter than those proposed by the FDA have been imposed for dozens of years on ads for prescription drugs, the great majority of which are non- addictive and pose much fewer health risks.

The same is true, he notes, for other products which deliver nicotine to their purchasers, including nicotine gums, patches, and inhalants.

Moreover, says law professor John Banzhaf, "those who seek to sell bonds are limited to ads in the so-called 'tombstone format' of plain black words on a white background and no pictures at all. If ads which have no impact on children whatsoever and can cause only minor financial loss can be limited so strictly, certainly ads which impact children and help cause at least 1000 every day to try a practice which will kill them can be regulated at least as strictly."

The FDA has proposed to forbid brand-name advertising at sporting events and on products not related to tobacco use, such as T-shirts and hats; forbid outdoor tobacco ads within 1,000 feet of schools and playgrounds; limit advertising in publications that reach a significant number of children and teenagers to black-and-- white text only; make manufacturers, distributors and retailers responsible for underage sales; and require tobacco companies to pay for a $150 million advertising campaign to discourage teen smoking.

Prof. Banzhaf is Executive Director of Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), the organization the tobacco industry blames for the FDA's decision to seek to regulate tobacco advertising and promotions directed at kids.

Below is a syllabus of the decision which seeks to summarize the facts and set forth the highlights of the various opinions written by the different justices:

ASH -ACTION ON SMOKING AND HEALTH 2013H Street, NW / Washington, DC 20006 / (202) 659-4310