Reactions to Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc.

Today’s New York Times presents an editorial criticizing the majority opinion for making it harder to governments to protect consumers. Nina Totenberg’ s NPR report on the ruling includes the prediction from First Amendment litigator Robert Corn-Revere of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP that Sorrell may energize the tobacco industry’s efforts to challenge the FDA’s new graphic image requirements for cigarettes labels.  On Scotusblog, Lyle Denniston examines Justice Kennedy’s and Justice Breyer’s differing perspectives on the Vermont law and on the implications of the Court’s ruling for economic regulation regimes that include efforts to regulate expression.  On Volokh Conspiracy, Eugene Volokh puts Sorrell in the broader context of the Court’s struggles with how to apply the First Amendment to commercial speech.     

JFB