Judge To Bloomberg: Cram Soda Law Where Sun Don't Shine
I've already covered NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg's food naziism extensively, but breaking news beckons! I had quite the jubilant response when Judge Tingling (yes, it's hard not to make a "Judge's Decision Leaves Us Tingling With Love Of Liberty" pun) struck down the Mayor's rights-infringing Soda-law with some very choice statements.
"It is arbitrary and capricious because it applies to some but not all food establishments in the city, it excludes other beverages that have significantly higher concentrations of sugar sweeteners and/or calories on suspect grounds, and the loopholes inherent in the rule ... serve to gut the purpose of the rule," he wrote.
But more poignantly, he also stated that the law..
"if upheld, would ... violate the separation of powers doctrine. The rule would not only violate the separation of powers doctrine, it would eviscerate it. Such an evisceration has the potential to be more troubling than sugar sweetened beverages."
If only the judges in the Supreme Court also understood the basics of separation of powers! But, unfortunately, Obama still runs unchecked.The crux of the defeated law, via Reuters:
Beverage manufacturers, restaurant and movie theater owners and other business groups had called the soda law an illegal overreach that would infringe upon consumers' personal liberty.The regulation would have prohibited the city's food-service establishments from selling sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces (47 cl) starting on Tuesday, though city officials had said they would not begin imposing $200 fines on offending businesses until June.But the ban only applied to businesses under the auspices of the health department, since it was the mayor-controlled health board, and not the city council, that approved the policy last fall. That meant that grocery and convenience stores - including 7 Eleven and its 64-ounce Big Gulp - were exempt from the regulation's reach.
I'll quote my own previous articles to sum this up:
As I’ve argued before, government involvement in health care is a slippery slope, and its involvement in our lives and diet is, and always will be, a bad idea. As government works its tentacles into our daily lives in the form of healthcare, it will feel empowered to dictate exactly what we can or can’t eat, because after all, the government is looking out for our well being and more importantly is on the hook for the bill. As I stated in my other article:The government is taking a stance of assumed negligence on the part of every American – that we don’t know enough to do what is in our own self-interests and that they must act to prevent theoretical threats from befalling us. Once the precedent is set that the government is our unofficial caretaker and well-being watchdog, there is nothing to stand in the way of constant sweeping mandates to the way in which we live our lives under the auspices of keeping America healthy.Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!
