Law, Business and Society 11th Edition by Tony McAdams

Exercise 49

Inspired by then-mayor Michael Bloomberg, the New York City Board of Health in 2012 approved a ban on the sale of sugary drinks in containers over 16 ounces in restaurants, stadiums, theaters, and other establishments regulated by the city health department. The rule did not forbid refills. According to the city, a switch from 20- to 16-ounce drinks by New Yorkers would "save" 2.3 million pounds per year. Americans drink much more soda than residents of other nations, and the U.S. bill for diabetes is about $245 billion annually. Opponents see the rule as more government overreach by a "nanny state" determined to diminish personal freedom. A New York Times poll found about 6 in 10 New Yorkers opposed the ban. Some critics even consider the ban a discriminatory and paternalistic attack on minority populations who tend to suffer most from obesity-related problems. The New York Times has pointed out, however, that many of the minority groups opposing the ban are the beneficiaries of tens of millions of dollars in beverage industry scholarships, conferences, and financial literacy classes.
The contentious soda ban was struck down by a local state court judge in 2013, determining the rule wasn't founded in fact and was riddled with loopholes and exceptions, making it unlawfully "arbitrary and capricious." The judge also found that the board of health " trespassed" on the legislative powers of the New York City Council, thus "eviscerating" the constitutional separation of powers doctrine.
Professor David B. Agus asks: "[W]hen does regulating a person's habits in the name of good health become our moral and social duty " Answer his question. See David B. Agus, "The 2,000-Year-Old Wonder Drug," The New York Times, December 11, 2012 [www.nytimes.com/].