Is halted by NY Supreme Court judge. I Was going to put this out in the main O/T but I know where this will end up leading to so I will just put it here. I thought we had a thread about this a while back but cant seem to find it.....
In short Bloom-turd just got
Dicuss
In short Bloom-turd just got
A state judge stopped the Bloomberg administration from banning the sale of large sugary drinks at restaurants and other venues, a major defeat for the mayor.
Originally posted by WSJ article
By MICHAEL HOWARD SAUL
State judge on Monday stopped Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration from banning the sale of large sugary drinks at New York City restaurants and other venues, a major defeat for a mayor who has made public-health initiatives a cornerstone of his tenure.
The city is "enjoined and permanently restrained from implementing or enforcing the new regulations," wrote New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling, blocking the rules one day before they would have taken effect. The city's chief counsel, Michael Cardozo, pledged to quickly appeal the ruling.
In halting the drink rules, Judge Tingling noted that the incoming sugary drink regulations were "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences" that would be difficult to enforce with consistency "even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole."
"The loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the stated purpose of the rule," the judge wrote. (Read the full text of the ruling.)
Under a first-of-its-kind prohibition approved by the city Board of Health last year, establishments from restaurants to mobile food carts would have been prohibited from selling sugary drinks larger than 16 oz. After a three-month grace period, the city would have started fining violators $200 per sale.
The city rules, set to take effect on March 12, didn't include convenience stores, such as 7-Elevens, and supermarkets, both of which are regulated by the state government.
In his ruling, Judge Tingling found the Board of Health's mission is to protect New Yorkers by providing regulations that protect against diseases. Those powers, he argued, don't include the authority to "limit or ban a legal item under the guise of 'controlling chronic disease.' "
The board may supervise and regulate the city's food supply when it affects public health, but the City Charter clearly outlines when such steps may be taken: According to Judge Tingling, the city must face imminent danger due to disease.
"That has not been demonstrated," he wrote.
Judge Tingling also suggested that Mr. Bloomberg overstepped his powers by bringing the sugary drink rules before the Board of Health, which is solely appointed by him. The City Council, he wrote, is the legislative body "and it alone has the authority to legislate as the board seeks to do here."
City health officials, he wrote, aren't assigned the "sweeping and unbridled authority to define, create, authorize, mandate and enforce" the health code.
Across New York City, restaurants, bars and movie theaters had already started bracing for the change.
Brother Jimmy's BBQ, a chain with five locations in the city, had already ordered 1,000 new glasses for soft drinks at their five New York City locations. The restaurants serve soda in 24-oz. glasses, CEO Josh Lebowitz said earlier this month—8 oz. more than city's new rules.
The anti-obesity effort to limit sales of sugary drinks was one of a number of ambitious public-health initiatives Mr. Bloomberg has launched since taking office in 2002.
He first prohibited smoking in bars, which proved to be one of his most popular achievements despite initial resistance. By 2008, the city stopped restaurants from using all but trace amounts of transfats, and Mr. Bloomberg recently won some success in convincing global food companies to lower the amount of sodium in prepackaged products.
Limiting the size of sugary drinks, however, wasn't a policy broadly supported by voters. "He always tells us what to do. It's not just about soda," said Dante Nero, who was drinking a large cola while having lunch with a friend Monday at Dallas BBQ in Manhattan's East Village.
"It ridiculous to put this kind of money and legislation into something that people are going to find a way to bypass," said Mr. Nero, 46 years old, of Brooklyn.
When city health officials voted to approve the large-drink ban in the fall, they routinely pointed to statistics showing that 58% adults citywide are overweight or obese, and nearly 40% of public-school students in eighth grade or below are obese or overweight.
In the debate over the controversial rules, Bloomberg administration officials acknowledged many underlying causes of weight gain. But they defended limits targeting sugary drinks—with an eye toward soda—as a sensible step because the beverages can so readily can contribute to obesity, have little nutritional value and don't offer a feeling of fullness when consumed.
"This measure is part of the City's multipronged effort to combat the growing obesity epidemic, which takes the lives of more than 5,000 New Yorkers every year, and we believe the Board of Health has the legal authority—and responsibility—to tackle its leading causes," Mr. Cardozo, the city's top lawyer, said in response to the ruling Monday.
Critics have warned that the ban would punish the poor, who might try to save money by buying a larger drink to share—at the movies, for example.
Russell Levinson, general manager of Movieworld in Queens, said he was "very excited" with the court ruling Monday. The theater hadn't yet bought new soda cups because of the 90-day grace period for enforcement.
"We think it's the right decision, and we have all along," Mr. Levinson said. "I hope this is the end of it."
Chris Gindlesperger, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association, said the ruling "provides a sigh of relief to New Yorkers and thousands of small businesses in New York City that would have been harmed by this arbitrary and unpopular ban."
—Alison Fox contributed to this article.
State judge on Monday stopped Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration from banning the sale of large sugary drinks at New York City restaurants and other venues, a major defeat for a mayor who has made public-health initiatives a cornerstone of his tenure.
The city is "enjoined and permanently restrained from implementing or enforcing the new regulations," wrote New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling, blocking the rules one day before they would have taken effect. The city's chief counsel, Michael Cardozo, pledged to quickly appeal the ruling.
In halting the drink rules, Judge Tingling noted that the incoming sugary drink regulations were "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences" that would be difficult to enforce with consistency "even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole."
"The loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the stated purpose of the rule," the judge wrote. (Read the full text of the ruling.)
Under a first-of-its-kind prohibition approved by the city Board of Health last year, establishments from restaurants to mobile food carts would have been prohibited from selling sugary drinks larger than 16 oz. After a three-month grace period, the city would have started fining violators $200 per sale.
The city rules, set to take effect on March 12, didn't include convenience stores, such as 7-Elevens, and supermarkets, both of which are regulated by the state government.
In his ruling, Judge Tingling found the Board of Health's mission is to protect New Yorkers by providing regulations that protect against diseases. Those powers, he argued, don't include the authority to "limit or ban a legal item under the guise of 'controlling chronic disease.' "
The board may supervise and regulate the city's food supply when it affects public health, but the City Charter clearly outlines when such steps may be taken: According to Judge Tingling, the city must face imminent danger due to disease.
"That has not been demonstrated," he wrote.
Judge Tingling also suggested that Mr. Bloomberg overstepped his powers by bringing the sugary drink rules before the Board of Health, which is solely appointed by him. The City Council, he wrote, is the legislative body "and it alone has the authority to legislate as the board seeks to do here."
City health officials, he wrote, aren't assigned the "sweeping and unbridled authority to define, create, authorize, mandate and enforce" the health code.
Across New York City, restaurants, bars and movie theaters had already started bracing for the change.
Brother Jimmy's BBQ, a chain with five locations in the city, had already ordered 1,000 new glasses for soft drinks at their five New York City locations. The restaurants serve soda in 24-oz. glasses, CEO Josh Lebowitz said earlier this month—8 oz. more than city's new rules.
The anti-obesity effort to limit sales of sugary drinks was one of a number of ambitious public-health initiatives Mr. Bloomberg has launched since taking office in 2002.
He first prohibited smoking in bars, which proved to be one of his most popular achievements despite initial resistance. By 2008, the city stopped restaurants from using all but trace amounts of transfats, and Mr. Bloomberg recently won some success in convincing global food companies to lower the amount of sodium in prepackaged products.
Limiting the size of sugary drinks, however, wasn't a policy broadly supported by voters. "He always tells us what to do. It's not just about soda," said Dante Nero, who was drinking a large cola while having lunch with a friend Monday at Dallas BBQ in Manhattan's East Village.
"It ridiculous to put this kind of money and legislation into something that people are going to find a way to bypass," said Mr. Nero, 46 years old, of Brooklyn.
When city health officials voted to approve the large-drink ban in the fall, they routinely pointed to statistics showing that 58% adults citywide are overweight or obese, and nearly 40% of public-school students in eighth grade or below are obese or overweight.
In the debate over the controversial rules, Bloomberg administration officials acknowledged many underlying causes of weight gain. But they defended limits targeting sugary drinks—with an eye toward soda—as a sensible step because the beverages can so readily can contribute to obesity, have little nutritional value and don't offer a feeling of fullness when consumed.
"This measure is part of the City's multipronged effort to combat the growing obesity epidemic, which takes the lives of more than 5,000 New Yorkers every year, and we believe the Board of Health has the legal authority—and responsibility—to tackle its leading causes," Mr. Cardozo, the city's top lawyer, said in response to the ruling Monday.
Critics have warned that the ban would punish the poor, who might try to save money by buying a larger drink to share—at the movies, for example.
Russell Levinson, general manager of Movieworld in Queens, said he was "very excited" with the court ruling Monday. The theater hadn't yet bought new soda cups because of the 90-day grace period for enforcement.
"We think it's the right decision, and we have all along," Mr. Levinson said. "I hope this is the end of it."
Chris Gindlesperger, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association, said the ruling "provides a sigh of relief to New Yorkers and thousands of small businesses in New York City that would have been harmed by this arbitrary and unpopular ban."
—Alison Fox contributed to this article.
Comment