Lorillard Tobacco Company v. Reilly, 533 U.S. 525 (2001)

Lorillard Tobacco Company v. Reilly, 533
U.S. 525 (2001)
What is MA trying to do?
Types of Preemption
 Explicit
 Implicit
How is the United States Supreme Court's
preemption analysis similar to a Chevron
Preemption Language
Congress unequivocally precludes the
requirement of any additional statements on
cigarette packages beyond those provided in
§1333. 15 U. S. C. §1334(a).
Congress further precludes States or localities
from imposing any requirement or prohibition
based on smoking and health with respect to the
advertising and promotion of cigarettes. §1334(b).
What did Congress Intend with the
Cigarette Labeling Act?
What was MA's defense against preemption?
What did the court find was the congressional
 The context in which Congress crafted the
current pre-emption provision leads us to
conclude that Congress prohibited state
cigarette advertising regulations motivated by
concerns about smoking and health.
Justice Steven's Irony
Justice Stevens finds it ironic that we conclude that
"federal law precludes States and localities from
protecting children from dangerous products within 1,000
feet of a school," in light of our prior conclusion that the
"Federal Government lacks the constitutional authority to
impose a similarly-motivated ban" in United States v.
Lopez, 514 U. S. 549 (1995).
Why is this case different?
What could the state do?
Smokeless Tobacco and Cigars
Are these covered by the Act?
 Why?
What does the court see as the limitation on state
regulation of their advertising?
What is the state's justification for limiting
advertising near schools?
Why was 1000 feet too far?
Actions v. Speech
Could the state ban the sale of tobacco to
Can it ban the use unattended sales such as
vending machines?
Can it ban tobacco sales entirely?
Why is this different from bans on advertising?
Could Congress preempt state bans on tobacco
What Should We Do About Tobacco Use?
What is the public interest?
What are the individual liberties issues?
Are the other substances people want to use that
we ban?
Is tobacco different in any physiological, as
opposed to political sense?
How well do the other bans work?
What are the unintended consequences?