The New York State Court of Appeals ultimately made the right decision to block Bloomberg’s “soda ban”. There are some things that you can’t do, and there are some things that you aren’t allowed to do. The New York City Board of Health exceeded its regulatory authority by adopting the “Sugary Drinks Portion cap Rule”. “...The New York City Board of Health, in adopting
The Ninth Amendment provides: “The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. ”(Justice
It was undeniable that the eighth amendment needed to be added as a part of someone’s guaranteed
The Ninth Amendment states: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be constructed or deny or disparage others retained by the people” (Bill of Rights). This amendment was made to protect people’s rights. Including things like marriage, abortion, slavery, and police conduct. However, this modification has been compromised several times in the past and the present.
Goldberg argues that the violation of personal right are a violation of the Ninth Amendment, and the government or sate do not have the ability to violates these personal rights. He also explains that though the constitution states that the federal government should not infringe on the state’s actions the Fourth Amendment binds the state to the federal governments will. The is supported by Goldberg’s statement “Ninth Amendment, in indicating that not all such liberties are specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments, is surely relevant in showing the existence of other fundamental personal rights, now protected from state, as well as federal, infringement”. Both Douglas and Goldberg’s decisions show consistencies with Dworkin’s idea of legal
One reason why I'm against the ban is the government shouldn't be the ones making decisions for us. For example, in "Ban the Ban" by SidneyAnne Stone, she stated that "People might think it is not important because it is just soda but it is so much more than that—it is about freedom and the
Should soda really be considered as hazardous or toxic as people make it seem? In the texts “Three Cheers for the Nanny State”, “Ban the Ban”, and “Sodas a Problem But…”, it all shows evidence on how the soda ban is good or how it is bad. Also they talk about how it is harmful but is it really that harmful to where there is a need to ban it. Although some people may think the soda ban is a great idea there are numerous downsides to it such as only eliminating certain sizes, more harmful things to worry about, and that fact that there is no purpose behind the ban. The soda ban is a bad idea because it only eliminates certain sizes over 16oz.
The country was established to give people freedom, now it is being taken away. Furthermore, the soda ban should not be implemented because it interferes with people’s rights. The text, Soda's a Problem But..., states Mayor Bloomberg is "interfering in a basic, private transaction involving a perfectly legal substance." Also, in Ban the Ban, it is stated “That includes basic freedoms like what you are going to drink while watching a movie, and eating what will soon be un-buttered and un-salted popcorn, according to Mayor Bloomberg.”
¨Several critics questioned why the city was making proposal on sugary drinks a priority when some city schoolchildren have no physical education classes.¨ (Washington TImes) In New York, Mayor Bloomberg placed a law on the sizes of soda citizens are allowed to get. However, this caused a lot of controversy on whether the ban was good or bad. Despite the amount of people supporting the ban´s choice, the ban does have some downsides on it. It is not a good idea to limit the amount of a soda a person can purchase (or propose the ban) because it's not applying to all, it's taking rights away from people, and itś not a big deal.
The soda ban is a defective idea in itself because of the loopholes in the plan. As Karin Klien talks about the problem in her article “Sodas a Problem but…”, “Convenience stores such as 7-Eleven are overseen by State and would be exempt , but a Burger King across the street would be restricted” (Klien, 288). In addition, there isn’t a need for this soda ban because it makes no sense for a customer at a fast food restaurant (like Subway) to walk across the street and go to a 7-eleven, which is a state-ran store that has drinks that are over 16oz., and even over 64oz. People could even go to a grocery store and buy a 2-liter bottle of the sugary drink because it isn’t run by the city. Another way the soda ban contradicts itself is because of how you’d get the same amount of sugar if you were to drink a drink from a smoothie
Such as the Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly case which banned tobacco advertising. This decision was made even though it infringed on the corporations right to free speech (Hudson). I agree with this decision to ban tobacco advertising regardless of the fact that it is unconstitutional. This Supreme Court ruling refutes the validity of the argument that the individual right of free speech in advertising being more important than the common good, in this case the common good attributes to public health. It is clear these prescription drugs are a hazard to public health.
However, the ban was only on drinks like soda, not milkshakes, and not in all locations, either. The counterarguments to the ban included that it infringed on people’s liberties and that it actually was not efficient. According to one poll, people bought more soda when offered smaller portions than when buying larger portion. Additionally, 60% of New Yorkers opposed the
In the 9th Amendment it states that we also have rights that aren’t mentioned or specifically listed. Intended
Each year, billions of gallons of soda are sold in the United States alone.” Soda must be allowed to middle schoolers during school hours. Soda should be allowed because kids need more of a choice at school and soda is not the cause of all the bad stuff. Soda must be allowed at middle school because kids need more of a choice at school. At many schools the only things to drink are milk, water, and a few other juices you have to pay extra for.
Firstly, many New Yorkers view and consider this ban as an invasion into personal choice, rights and decision. The
