• Attorneys



• Cases and Documents



• Alan Morrison Supreme Court Assistance Project



• Freedom of Information Clearinghouse



• Consumer Justice Project



• Internet Free Speech



• Fellowship and Employment Opportunities



• FAQs



• Litigation Group
  E-Update

Federal Judge Upholds New York City’s Fast-Food Calorie Labeling Rule

On April 16, 2008, a federal judge ruled that fast-food chain restaurants in New York City must comply with a new requirement to disclose basic calorie information on their menus. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Holwell rejected arguments from the state restaurant association, which had alleged that the groundbreaking rule violated resturants' First Amendment rights and was preempted by the federal Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA), the law that governs nutrition labels on packaged foods.

Public Citizen filed a friend-of-the-court brief and presented oral argument in support of New York's rule, explaining that the NLEA expressly leaves cities and states free to regulate nutrition labeling in restaurants and that the First Amendment does not prevent reasonable commercial disclosure requirements. The Public Citizen brief was signed by a distinguished list of organizations and experts, including Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who was the author of the NLEA, as well as the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the American Diabetes Association, the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, the Medical Society of the State of New York, the Trust for America’s Health and several of the nation’s leading professors of nutrition and public health.

"Judge Holwell’s decision sets an important precedent that public health officials can look to as they draft similar regulations or legislation,” said Public Citizen attorney Deepak Gupta, who wrote the brief and presented oral arguments in the case. “Consumers need this type of nutrition information so they can make healthy decisions when they dine out."

The decision clears the way for New York City to enforce its labeling ordinance, which is designed to provide consumers with calories on fast-food menu boards and on printed menus. Public health advocates say Holwell’s ruling will pave the way for local governments across the country to pass similar labeling ordinances. Thus far, San Francisco and Washington’s King County, which includes Seattle, also have enacted menu labeling laws.

To learn more about this case, click here.

Public Citizen Litigation Group is the litigating arm of Public Citizen. The Group specializes in cases involving health and safety regulation, consumer rights, access to the courts, open government, and the First Amendment, including Internet free speech.

We litigate cases at all levels of the federal and state judiciaries and have a substantial practice before federal regulatory agencies. Our efforts are also pursued through programs such as the Alan Morrison Supreme Court Assistance Project and the Freedom of Information Clearinghouse.

featured focus on...
	Why Preemption Proponents Are Wrong Corporations defending products liability cases — concerning defective cars, mislabeled drugs, dangerous pesticides, or hazardous household cleaners — argue that federal regulation of their products bars (or "preempts") any recovery by people injured by those products. In this article, Litigation Group Director Brian Wolfman explains that, in fact, public health is maximized when court remedies work alongside federal regulation. Posted with permission of TRIAL (March 2007). Copyright American Association for Justice.
	Active Cases in the Supreme Court Public Citizen attorneys have argued 55 cases in front of the Supreme Court. For current information on our role in Supreme Court cases, visit the Alan Morrison Supreme Court Assistance Project.
	Internet Free Speech Public Citizen has developed a program of litigation and other forms of advocacy which protects the rights of ordinary citizens against those powerful entities who would seek to curtail or surpress the exchange of ideas and criticism this new technology enables
	Challenging Presidential Secrecy Public Citizen and a coalition of historians and journalists have brought suit challenging an Executive Order that seeks to give former presidents, vice presidents, and their agents the ability to block the release of records that must be released under the 1978 Presidential Records Act.