• Hery Michelle Min.
• Cornell J Law Public Policy. 2013 Jan 1;23(1):187-232.

AbstractThis Note examines New York City's Sugary Drinks Portion Cap Rule (Soda Ban), which was originally set to become effective March 12, 2013. The New York County Supreme Court's decision in New York Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene suspended the Soda Ban on March 11, 2013. The First Department of the Appellate Division of New York State Supreme Court affirmed the suspension on July 30, 2013. However, the complex economic policy and constitutional issues arising from the proposed Soda Ban deserve as much attention as the ultimate result of the legal challenge to the ban. Both courts struck down the Soda Ban on the grounds that it violated the separation of powers doctrine. The lower court further held that the Soda Ban was arbitrary and capricious. This Note does not focus solely on the holdings of the two courts, but takes a broader approach in analyzing the issues involved in the Soda Ban. By comparing and contrasting tobacco products with sugary beverages, this Note explains why the public seems to find the Soda Ban less appealing than tobacco regulations. Specifically, this Note addresses how the failed attempts of numerous states and cities to implement soda taxes demonstrate the complexity of policies geared toward curbing obesity; how fundamental values, such as health, fairness, efficiency, and autonomy factor into obesity policies; and the fact that legislatures and courts are struggling to determine the scope of public health law intervention. The Note explores how the Soda Ban, despite its judicial suspension, could represent a stepping-stone in combating the obesity epidemic.

18 keywords...

hide…