Monday, October 6, 2008

More on the Altria v. Good Oral Argument

An interesting analysis here on Scotusblog.  The official transcript is available here.  Some highlights of the Scotusblog analysis, by Lyle Denniston:

  • The government sided with the plaintiffs on the implied preemption quesiton, but only on that question.
  • But the judges weren't buying it - asking why the FTC hasn't regulated these misleading ads since they know about them for some time.  Justice Scalia said: “When did the Commission know this stuff?  I had a case when I sat on the Court of Appeals, so it had to be before 1984…It’s been general knowledge for a long time, and the FTC has done nothing abput it.”
  • The defendants oral argument focused on the express preemption issue only.  Denniston quotes the following exchange between the defendant's lawyer, Theodore Olson, and Justice Scalia --- Olson:  “I’d like to spend no time on the implied preemption argument."  Justice Scalia: “Good idea.”

ADL

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/mass_tort_litigation/2008/10/more-on-the-alt.html

Tobacco | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef01053564bc4b970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More on the Altria v. Good Oral Argument:

Comments

Post a comment