Skip to main content

A New York state judge on Monday threw out a ban on large sugary drinks set to go into effect in New York City on Tuesday, calling the new regulation “arbitrary and capricious.”

The new regulation—which would have limited the sale of sugary beverages including nondiet sodas, fruit drinks, sweetened teas and other high-calorie drinks to just 16 ounces—was championed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who said Tuesday that the city would immediately appeal the verdict. Bloomberg saw the ban as a way to fight the city's growing obesity epidemic.

But the American Beverage Association and other business groups representing bars, restaurants and bodegas had sued to stop the new law, arguing, in part, that it would create an uneven playing field for businesses. The law would have been enforced only on establishments regulated by the city's Health Department, while stores like 7-Eleven, which is regulated as a market by the state of New York, would have been exempt.

In his ruling, New York Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling agreed with that argument, calling the new regulation "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences.

"The simple reading of the rule leads to the earlier acknowledged uneven enforcement even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole," Tingling continued. "The loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the stated purpose of the rule."

At a news conference, Bloomberg called the judge's ruling "clearly in error." He likened the city's fight against obesity by curbing "empty calories to past regulatory hurdles, including the effort to ban lead paint and the fight to save Grand Central station from demolition in the 1970s.

"We have a responsibility as human beings to do something, to save each other, to save the lives of ourselves, our families, our friends, and all of the rest of the people that live on God’s planet. And so while other people will wring their hands over the problem of sugary drinks, in New York City, we’re doing something about it," Bloomberg declared. "We believe it is reasonable and responsible to draw a line... As a matter of fact, it would be irresponsible not to try to do everything we can to save lives."

In his ruling, Tingling also criticized Bloomberg's decision to implement the ban without a vote of the New York City Council. The regulation was passed into law by a decree issued last September by the city's Health Department. Bloomberg's office had defended the regulation and its passage by arguing that the mayor has a broad mandate to protect and improve the health of New York City residents.

But Tingling was skeptical of that defense, writing that "interpretation" of the law would give the mayor and the city's Health Department the "authority to define, create, mandate and enforce (laws) limited only by its imagination." The regulation, the justice wrote, "would create an administrative Leviathan and violate the separation of powers doctrine. ... It would eviscerate it."

Tingling added: "Such an evisceration has the potential to be more troubling than sugar-sweetened beverages."

 

More:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ti...47946--politics.html

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

If I lived in New York, I'd be angry that the mayor was wasting time and taxpayer's money on something that ridiculous. Why does he think banning big gulps is going to help obesity? People that want a 32 oz drink will simply purchase two 16 oz drinks.  The government shouldn't police a person's diet. We have the right to eat heathly or unhealthy, whichever we choose.  He should put the time, effort & money into something else. JMHO

This is Bloombergs short sighted response to a growing (no pun intended) problem.  It doesn't govern convenience stores as they fall under the authority of the State.    But as far as other venues, it doesn't make any sense.    Just buy more of the 16oz. drinks if you want more.   What is he really curtailing in the long run?  

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×