The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to decide whether federally mandated warnings on cigarette packages that clearly state the health risks of smoking violate the free speech rights of tobacco companies that oppose such labels.
The justices rejected an appeal by RJ Reynolds and other tobacco companies against a lower court ruling, which found that a batch of health warnings required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration did not violate the companies’ rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The action taken by the judges means that the lower court ruling still stands.
The agency adopted this rule in 2020 during the first presidential administration of Donald Trump. The US Food and Drug Administration has required that warnings about the dangers of smoking occupy the top 50% of cigarette packages and the top 20% of advertisements. The regulation is technically in effect, but the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has generally refrained from enforcing it amid legal challenges.
The set of 11 warnings includes images of amputated feet and toes, a baby with stunted fetal growth, and a woman with a large lump on her neck caused by cancer, as well as written descriptions of various health risks.
RJ Reynolds, part of British American Tobacco, ITG Brands, part of Imperial Brands, Liggett, part of Vector Group, and other tobacco companies filed suit in 2020 to challenge the warning labels.
The companies claimed, among other things, that the health warnings violated their free speech rights by forcing companies to endorse the U.S. government’s anti-smoking message through images that they said misrepresented or exaggerated the health consequences of smoking.
Smoking rates in the United States have declined significantly in the past six decades, from 42.6% of American adults in 1965 to 11.6% in 2022, according to the American Lung Association. But according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, smoking still causes more than 480,000 deaths in the United States annually.
The US Food and Drug Administration said that the warnings are justified by the US government’s interest in promoting greater understanding of the health risks resulting from smoking, and reducing confusion and deception. The agency said the pictorial warnings were necessary because text-only warnings failed to deter teens from smoking.
U.S. District Judge J. Campbell Parker in Tyler, Texas, blocked the regulation in 2022, finding that the graphic warnings violated First Amendment protections.
But the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans found in March that the disputed warnings were “factual and uncontroversial” and thus met the relevant legal standards under the First Amendment. This prompted the tobacco companies to appeal to the Supreme Court.
On Monday, RJ Reynolds declined to comment on the court’s decision to reject his appeal.
In a separate case involving the Food and Drug Administration, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on December 2 about the agency’s denial of requests to sell flavored e-cigarette products.