Quiz 6: Administrative Agencies
Before enacting any new regulation, agencies have to go through promulgation and public comment process, which includes research and public review and response to those rules. However, following the terrorist attacks of September 11 th the government needed to make timely decisions on regulation which affected security hence it gave the FAA authority to make rules to add on to security.
Case summary: As per the rule declared by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cigarette manufacturers have to print 12 warnings in their pack of cigarette. These warnings would take up 50% space on a cigarette pack and the rest space could be used by the manufacturer for the advertisement of its cigarette brand. After the renewal of the rule, FDA came out with nine texts that have to be printed on the cigarette cover that will provide the message about ill effects of smoking. The tobacco companies argued that this rule is the violation of their First Amendment as they are required to write and provide messages as suggested and given by the government. Conclusion: Tobacco companies can set this rule declared by FDA in a way that the companies can discuss this with the government that they will print strict warning message stating about the fatal effects of smoking instead of putting nine messages of the same category and signifying similar message and warning about cigarette smoking. This way the tobacco companies could save itself from printing such a long warnings covering half of the package of cigarette. As per my opinion, the rule declared by FDA could not be set aside and should not be because it is very necessary for a product like cigarette should carry warnings about the ill effects of its consumption. But FDA can undertake and consider manufacturers request of letting them put one warning message that contains the gist of all the nine warning messages given by it.
Case Facts: The TPC Health Department established a set of rules for ambulatory care after investigation of the ambulance services in the county. The local news requested information from the health department regarding its investigation. The health department refused to disclose the requested information claiming exemption from public disclosure act through protecting privacy and need for effective investigation. The news channel filed a complaint to court. Under FOIA, Exemption 6 and 7(F) states that information that would invade someone else's personal privacy or endanger their physical safety should not be disclosed to the public. When the news channel asked for the details of the investigation and the sources of the health department, the department refused to share the names of their sources and names of the ambulance companies. The health department claimed that all requested info was exempt from disclosure, the court disagreed. Only the names and identifying features of people in the documents should be kept confidential. Thus, the names are subject to Freedom of Information A ct as disclosing them would endanger the personal safety and privacy of the sources.