He's a smoker.. would be kinda sweet to get him a big ol' Chuck to puff away on in the Oval Office.
Smoking Everywhere V. FDA Daily Docket Sheet Update--APPEAL's COURT ISSUES STAY
- Thread starter Sun Vaporer
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
He's a smoker.. would be kinda sweet to get him a big ol' Chuck to puff away on in the Oval Office.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
If anyone has the full text of the brief filed by e-cigarette prohibitionist, please post.
And if the Washington Legal Foundation filed a brief (which somebody claimed in a previous posting), please post its text as well (as this is the first I've heard about it).
Nobody should be surprised that ACS, ALA, AHA, ASH and others have joined together to file a brief, as that's the way they've been operating for more than a decade.
What I find unfortunate and irresponsible is that some folks on this forum are predicting gloom and doom defeat before they've even read the motion, before the court has considered it, and before the court has ruled on it.
And if the Washington Legal Foundation filed a brief (which somebody claimed in a previous posting), please post its text as well (as this is the first I've heard about it).
Nobody should be surprised that ACS, ALA, AHA, ASH and others have joined together to file a brief, as that's the way they've been operating for more than a decade.
What I find unfortunate and irresponsible is that some folks on this forum are predicting gloom and doom defeat before they've even read the motion, before the court has considered it, and before the court has ruled on it.
I'd have sent him one, but with the FDA's attitude, I figured the Secret Service would probably come arrest me for terrorism...
Bill,
Only a notice of intent to file has been presented to the Court, I believe. Neither of these briefs have been submitted as of yet.
Jan
Last edited:
What SE/njoy should be saying after that filing:
"Dear appeals court people,
As a relatively small company, we do not have enough resources to combat the vast amount of power and money that is being thrown against us. You have to ask yourselves, if the FDA has a such a legitimate case, why is so much effort being dumped into defeating our products? LOOK AT THE NAMES ON THAT LIST!! The facts and the law MUST NOT be on the side of the FDA!"
"Dear appeals court people,
As a relatively small company, we do not have enough resources to combat the vast amount of power and money that is being thrown against us. You have to ask yourselves, if the FDA has a such a legitimate case, why is so much effort being dumped into defeating our products? LOOK AT THE NAMES ON THAT LIST!! The facts and the law MUST NOT be on the side of the FDA!"
if the FDA's stance is that these are not tobacco products and are drug delivery devices... exactly why are anti tobacco and andi smoking groups chiming in on their side?
one would think for their briefs to even have any bearing or point then the FDA would have to conceed that they're tobacco products...
And if they admit they're tobacco products then wouldn't that invalidate any ban since the FDA can't outright ban tobacco products?
Seems to me that while it looks bad...all these anti tobacco groups filing in support of the FDA could actually be helping as they're obviously viewing e-cigs as a tobacco product/alternative...
one would think for their briefs to even have any bearing or point then the FDA would have to conceed that they're tobacco products...
And if they admit they're tobacco products then wouldn't that invalidate any ban since the FDA can't outright ban tobacco products?
Seems to me that while it looks bad...all these anti tobacco groups filing in support of the FDA could actually be helping as they're obviously viewing e-cigs as a tobacco product/alternative...
The Appeals Court Justices are not stupid, they wouldn't be Federal Judges if they were. I believe that they know what's really going on here and will be unbiased and won't be swayed by the absurd arguments of the antis or the FDA.
I hope. The honesty of the higher courts is the only thing that I have left to believe in anymore.
I hope. The honesty of the higher courts is the only thing that I have left to believe in anymore.
we now need to start to look into the underground/black market if we're going to continue vaping.
Looks like it's time to dust off my old forum.
The Association of Personal Vaporers Message Board - Login
Just in case . . . registered! Thanks BigJim.
As for "clout" and "power" with the courts, well, the courts are supposed to rule based upon the law, not bowing to "clout" and "power." But since the Washington Legal Foundation is indeed well known in the legal community, I would suggest that they have no less "clout" or "power" than the alphabet soup of "charities" when it comes to presenting to the Court of Appeals.
A doom and gloom attitude is defeatist and unwarranted. In Illinois, we stood toe to toe against a paid lobbyist representing the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, and the American Cancer Society . . . and we won.
And regardless of the outcome at the Court of Appeals, the case in chief has yet to be heard.
This is far from over.
I know one thing. They made my yearly donation chart a lot smaller.
Let's just hope that the budgets of the organizations that are out to kill us were affected by this.
Julie --Everyone is entitled to their opinion. That means you, me, and every other Member. Using words like "unwarranted" or "defeatist" are your words--and not mine. As for "clout", yes Julie, Courts in the real world do give deference to agencies such as the The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Heart Association, the American Legacy Foundation, the American Lung Association, the American Medical Association.
And contrary to what you state, IMO, the Appeals Court will interpret the statutory construction here and determine, as a matter of law, whether the e-cig is a "tobacco" product or a "drug" and remand the case back to the District Court to issue a ruling consistent with its opinion. The Appeals Court did not grant leave to entertain this Interlocutory Appeal just to have a "little discussion".
That is where we are headed IMO.
Sun
Last edited:
LOL . . . well, you are indeed entitled to your opinion, Sun. Personally, I think you're a Gloomy Gus, but, then, I am perhaps more than a bit of a Pollyanna. 
But, frankly, I would prefer to have a half full glass than a half empty one.
But, frankly, I would prefer to have a half full glass than a half empty one.
LOL . . . well, you are indeed entitled to your opinion, Sun. Personally, I think you're a Gloomy Gus, but, then, I am perhaps more than a bit of a Pollyanna.
Sun and Julie, perhaps we can agree that the truth lies somewhere in the middle?
Sun and Julie, perhaps we can agree that the truth lies somewhere in the middle?
Last edited:
Question for the lawyers:
Sorry, started a new thread in the Law subforum
Sorry, started a new thread in the Law subforum
Last edited:
LOL . . . well, you are indeed entitled to your opinion, Sun. Personally, I think you're a Gloomy Gus, but, then, I am perhaps more than a bit of a Pollyanna.
Sun and Julie, perhaps we can agree that the truth lies somewhere in the middle?
It is not about "Gloom" Jerry. For me, it is and always will be about not "staying the course" and thinking "everything will be fine". To me that is denial of what we are up against and causes inaction and "going with the flow" IMO.
I remember the days on this Board when the majority screamed at the top of their lungs that "they will never bother to attempt to ban the e-cig" and "they can not ban the hardware" or "it will never happen".
It was only until this case was filed and States started to file legislation that advocacy started. So it is not a question of truth Jerry, rather facing the fact that this is no easy battle we have here.
Sun
I posted this in the other thread on this topic, but will post it here as well. Curious if anyone else finds this significant.
The DC Circuit Court of Appeals is actually packed with Judges who were appointed by republicans. I am not a republican myself, but this might be a good thing on this particular issue, as conservative judges tend to not favor expansive regulatory powers for federal agencies.
Of the 14 judges in this circuit, 1 was appointed by Carter, 5 were appointed by Reagan, 2 by GHWB, 3 by Clinton and 3 by GWB. If we assume that the judges appointed by repub presidents lean conservative (not always the case but then the reverse is not always true either), then 10 of 14 are conservative leaning.
I believe that cases are typically heard by a panel of 3 judges who are randomly chosen.
This is obviously not a definitive prediction of outcome. Just another piece of information to add to the mix.
- wolf
The DC Circuit Court of Appeals is actually packed with Judges who were appointed by republicans. I am not a republican myself, but this might be a good thing on this particular issue, as conservative judges tend to not favor expansive regulatory powers for federal agencies.
Of the 14 judges in this circuit, 1 was appointed by Carter, 5 were appointed by Reagan, 2 by GHWB, 3 by Clinton and 3 by GWB. If we assume that the judges appointed by repub presidents lean conservative (not always the case but then the reverse is not always true either), then 10 of 14 are conservative leaning.
I believe that cases are typically heard by a panel of 3 judges who are randomly chosen.
This is obviously not a definitive prediction of outcome. Just another piece of information to add to the mix.
- wolf
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
