Tobacco Companies Fight Court Order to Fess Up About Lying

WASHINGTON - Feb. 24, 2015 - PRLog -- WASHINGTON, D.C. (February 24,  2015):  Several courts, after reviewing extensive evidence, has concluded that the major tobacco companies deliberately deceived the American public about the dangers of smoking, but now the companies are balking at telling the public about these findings.

        In arguing before the U.S. Court of Appeals, the cigarette makers said it was “humiliating” to require them to make the simple factual statement that "a federal court has ruled that [tobacco companies] deliberately deceived the American public about the health effects of smoking," even though just such a finding was in fact made by U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler in a RICO case brought against them.

        To their argument that the issue was still being litigated in other courts - which of course doesn't make the disputed admission incorrect - Judge Harry Edwards said he was “perplexed” by the argument since it would be a "nightmare" if every judge would have to look to all other courts before deciding whether a mandated disclosure was fair, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf,  the man behind both the RICO law suit, and also the concept of corrective advertising for misleading advertising.

        A lengthy memo outlining the legal theories under which the tobacco companies could be sued under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization {RICO] Act originated with Banzhaf, and helped lead to this legal victory under which the companies have been ordered to make this disclosure.

        Moreover, the concept of ordering companies which had engaged in deceptive practices to confess to the public in their ads that they lied in the past goes back much further.

        Banzhaf and his law students were the first to persuade the Federal Trade Commission [FTC] -  in a proceeding involving Campbell's Soup - that it had the power to order companies to confess to the public in their ads how they had deceived them in the past.

        Several of those also “humiliating” mandated disclosures made it clear that the earlier representations were deceptive.  For example, Listerine was required to advise consumers in its ads that "contrary to prior advertising, Listerine will not help prevent colds or sore throats or lessen their severity."

        “It's very satisfying, at a time when so many people criticize law professors for teaching only theory and not practice, and for doing little more than writing increasingly useless and irrelevant law review articles, to be able to point to important public health accomplishments from their efforts in the real world; victories expected to save lives by helping to persuade youngsters not to take up smoking," suggests Banzhaf.

        Prof. Banzhaf also brought legal actions which led to the first dramatic decline in cigarette consumption, the ban on cigarette commercials, started the modern nonsmokers' movement which is banning smoking in so many places here and abroad, helped to kill off Joe Camel and cigarette billboards, supported other law suits against the tobacco companies which led to billion-dollar verdicts, etc.

        He’s been called the "Ralph Nader of the Tobacco Industry,"  "Mr. Anti-Smoking," "One of the Most Vocal and Effective Anti-Tobacco Attorneys," "a Driving Force Behind the Lawsuits That Have Cost Tobacco Companies Billions of Dollars," and "The Law Professor Who Masterminded Litigation Against the Tobacco Industry."  His most recent target has been e-cigarettes.

JOHN F. BANZHAF III, B.S.E.E., J.D., Sc.D.
Professor of Public Interest Law
George Washington University Law School,
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor,
Fellow, World Technology Network,
Founder, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
2000 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052, USA
(202) 994-7229 // (703) 527-8418
http://banzhaf.net/ @profbanzhaf