TheAgitator.com
Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger, Cheeseburger
Thursday, March 11th, 2004Glen Whitman gets the just-passed “Cheesburger Bill” right. The bill would forbid all obesity-related lawsuits against fast food companies in both state and federal court.
I can’t tell you how very much I want to support this bill. The U.S. Congress has finally taken a small stand for personal responsibility. And I think you could even make a strained argument that it’s a legitimate use of the Commerce Clause — if California, for example, decided to open its courts to all fat-suit takers in an effort to protect its own consumers against obesity and health care costs, consumers across the country could feel the pinch. The effects of such a move would, after all, be well-felt outside the borders of the state passing a friendly “fat tort” law.
In the end, however, I think the argument fails. This is Congress dictating by federal fiat what each state’s tort law ought to be. And I suppose if I’m going to interpret the Commerce Clause narrowly enough to criticize federal action on telemarketers and prison rape, I ought to be consistent, and say that this fails, too. Of course, I’d support each and every state legislature passing its own version of the bill.
It damn sure hurts to stick to principle on this one. For the love of Dom Deluise, I’m on the same side as CSPI!
Article III, Section 2 extends federal judiciary authority to cover (among other things) law suits ‘between citizens of different states’.
So unless the suit occurs in the state where McDonald’s is incorporated and all of the plaintiffs are residents of the same state, the suit is properly within the purview of the federal courts, not the state courts.
Yes, but this is Congress acting to suppress lawsuits in state courts. Article III, Section II applies to the federal judiciary, not to Congress.
I have no problem with Congress saying you can’t bring suit against fast food companies in federal court.
And according to McD’s SEC filings, they’re incorporated in (not really a suprise) Delaware.
So it would seem to me that residents of Delaware are the only people in the country who should be allowed to sue McDonald’s (i.e. the corporation as a whole) in state court.
Now admittedly, I’m not a lawyer, so your mileage may vary.
Congress isn’t supressing lawsuits in state court, the plaintiffs in (for example) the New York case don’t have a right to sue McD’s in state court to begin with. So that right can’t be supressed by Congress merely reasserting that preexisting fact.
this is all so short sided anyways. why should trial lawyers bother suing mcdonalds? the US government is where the big dollars are. if you can sue the EPA for not passing stringent enough environmental regulations to prevent law abiding companies from poisoning you, why cant you sue the FDA for allowing law abiding food companies from making you unhealthy?
trial lawyers should be targeting the FDA for the big money.
mike
Cheez!
Nobody I know realizes that this flies in the face of the democracy we all know and love.
Congress and the Supreme Court knows that democracy was invented solely to prevent anybody being held responsible or accountable for any thing including personal responsibility.
Any court federal or state can exercise jurisdiction over an out of state corporation that “purposefully avails” itself to the jurisdiction of that state (or state in which the federal court resides) and when the exercise of jurisdiction will not result in “fundamental unfairness.” So Micky D’s the big corp can be sued anywhere pretty much.
As for the commerce clause, that is a very tricky question. But to the extent this deals (1) with economic behavior and (2) these state lawsuits involve potential extraterritorial effects, this use of the commerce power is pretty justifiable. It has been used as such since the “Shreveport Rate Cases” to shut down meddlesome and effectively protectionist state law legislation.
I don’t believe this requires giving up the baby by acknowledging the rightness of Wickard or generic federal regulations. But uniform regulations (or removal of regulations) can facilitiate interstate commerce and, as a constitutional matter, I think this type of thing would pass muster, just as much as a law mandating 50 state reciprocity of concealed carry permits would, or a law forbidding some chokepoint state (like Pennsylvania) from charging $2,000 to anyone who would try to traverse the state to reach another state to make a delivery, for example. These meddlesome and unjust lawsuits seem to me akin to such a tariff/tax. (Courts in fact can independently strike down such laws under the so-called “dormant commerce clause power.”)
That’s my $.02.
Cheeseburger bill passes House
By a vote of 276 to 139 with most Democrats opposed, the House gave its approval to a bill that would bar lawsuits against the food industry over obesity. (Christopher Lee, “House bill bans suits blaming eateries for obesity”, Washington…
The Cheeseburger Bill: constitutional?
The Cheeseburger Bill is simply and plainly as unconstitutional as a Big Mac cooked at a Burger King. What I find stunning is the lack of support this clear outcome finds in the blawgosphere.
I’m not sure what federal diversity jurisdiction has to to with the prudence or propriety of this bill, especially if it’s being used in an argument in favor of Congress dictating tort law to the states. Could someone elucidate this for me?
I reluctantly agree with you on the federalism principle. The problem is that most state legsliatures and jurists are dumb. They don’t realize that Mickey D’s could should say “Screw you, I’m going home” (/Cartman voice).
There is nothing to say that Mickey D’s has to be present in every state. If you make your state too unprofitable, they’ll leave. Do you really want that?
Byna, wishes the “french” fry had never been invented. (Down 5 lbs to 209!) (I’m 6’1″, so 209 is not too terribly bad) (Did I just disclose too much PMI?)
The question of whether Congress can ban “federal and state courts” or “just federal courts” from entertaining these lawsuits is irrelevant. Lawsuits filed in federal courts are generally diversity actions arising out of state, not federal, law. This bill essentially seeks to ban all actions arising out of state law. And as I explained in my own blawg, that is patently unconstitutional under the commerce clause and principles of federalism.
Radley,
I am NOT a lawyer specializing in constitutional law but I think its more like “Cheebuga, Cheebuga, Cheebuga”.
As for diversity, I agree that it does not really matter as to the constitutionality of this. Under diversity jurisdiction, federal court’s apply state substantive law. I was merely responding to Stormy Dragon’s (incorrect) point above that the plaintiffs should not be allowed to sue McDonald’s in state court. Sure they can.
Questions like these are the reason I didn’t score higher on the “Libertarian Purity Test”(more like Anarchist!). As wrong as it may be constitutionally, I’m still happy to see Congress do something to help weed out all of the stupid people, instead of cater to them. The Constitution may be losing out on this one, but at least personal responsibility is getting some stage time.
Chris — I’m not a fan of the libertarian purity test, but I don’t think federalism is one of the items you get tested on. The interest in federalism is mainly an *American* libertarian interest, since we have a constitutional system based on that principle. The argument is that the gains from reducing the power of the federal government and increasing competition among the states would outweigh the small losses in cases like this.
The Constitution is not “losing out on this one” and I doubt it will. The Bill has not passed the Senate for one thing, and history has shown that the Senate is far more responsible in respecting its constitutional limits than the House. And consequently, this bill hasn’t become law yet and therefore can’t be challenged in court yet. When (and if) it does become law, I assure you it WILL be challenged and it WILL be struck down for the reasons I’ve stated.
Cheeseburger bill passes House
By a vote of 276 to 139 with most Democrats opposed, the House gave its approval to a bill that would bar lawsuits against the food industry over obesity. (Christopher Lee, “House bill bans suits blaming eateries for obesity”, Washington…
Take your time to check out some relevant pages dedicated to online casino online casino http://www.favorite-casino.com/online-casino.html http://www.favorite-casino.com/online-casino.html slot machines slot machines http://www.favorite-casino.com/slot-machines.html http://www.favorite-casino.com/slot-machines.html … Thanks!!!
In your free time, visit some relevant information about online casinos online casinos http://www.favorite-casino.com/online-casinos.html http://www.favorite-casino.com/online-casinos.html online casino online casino http://www.favorite-casino.com/online-casino.html http://www.favorite-casino.com/online-casino.html …
Take your time to visit some information in the field of texas holdem texas holdem http://www.ppp-poker.com/texas-holdem.html http://www.ppp-poker.com/texas-holdem.html …
You may find it interesting to check some relevant information on how to win texas holdem poker how to win texas holdem poker http://www.evilplots.com/texas-holdem.html http://www.evilplots.com/texas-holdem.html .
As a result earn round bullets free texas holdem poker games blind video flop http://www.hskohap.com/free-texas-holdem.html double parlay free texas holdem http://www.hskohap.com/free-texas-holdem.html complete shuffling!
Would You card party poker bonus stack http://www.rdavisinc.com/party-poker-bonus.html texas bluff main party poker bonus http://www.rdavisinc.com/party-poker-bonus.html reels risk.
You variations upcard showdown party poker room monster http://www.collinsdollnissan.com/party-poker.html party poker http://www.collinsdollnissan.com/party-poker.html percentage quads em belly?
Viewed as money texas holdem house cheating rundown soft http://www.lepcart.com/texas-holdem.html variations heads jackpot under rooms texas holdem http://www.lepcart.com/texas-holdem.html bust.
Find empire poker push http://www.empirepoker-room.us toke pair circle empire poker http://www.empirepoker-room.us soft?
In your free time, check out some relevant information on PLAY ROULETTE ONLINE freeroll – Tons of interesdting stuff!!!