Briefs Authored by Public Good
For more information about a case, click on the case description below.
- Philadelphia may legally impose a tax on sweetened beverages to fund services to low-income residents.
• Williams v. City of Philadelphia (Pennsylvania Supreme Court)
- Are the First Amendment rights of soft drink advertisers violated by an ordinance requiring prominent health warnings on advertisements for sugar sweetened beverages?
• American Beverage Ass’n v. City & County of San Francisco (U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit)
- The NYC Board of Health May Require Chain Restaurants to Post Warnings Alerting Customers to High Sodium Menu Items.
• National Restaurant Ass’n v. New York City Dept. of Health and Mental Hygiene (N.Y. Supreme Court, Appellate Div.)
- Should the First Amendment protect food companies that want to label genetically modified foods as “natural,” and don’t want to disclose the presence of genetically modified ingredients?
• Grocery Manufacturers’ Ass’n v. Sorrell (U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit)
- Did New York City Dept. of Health act arbitrarily and capriciously in limiting sizes of servings of sugar-sweetened beverages, in effort to combat obesity health crisis?
• New York Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. New York City Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene (N.Y. Court of Appeals)
- A lenient standard of First Amendment review applies when government requires companies to disclose factual information for the public interest.
• American Meat Inst. v. United States Dept. of Agriculture (U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, en banc)