Theoretically, when a health crisis is identified, the government should spring into action to address the problem, explained Richard Daynard, PhD, a law professor at Northeastern University in Boston and chair of the Tobacco Product Liability Project. But in this case, the court said the executive branch is powerless. Because the court ruled the way it did, the principal arms of government are disabled. All that is left now are class action suits and state laws, he said. Still, within hours of the decision, public health advocates, including organizations such as the AMA, some Capitol Hill Democrats and even President Clinton, called for Congress to step in and legislate FDA this authority.
Advocates also call for the ability to set stringent safety standards and revise health warnings.
Mary Aronson, a Washington, D.C.-based analyst who tracks tobacco for institutional investors, doubted that anything would occur quickly, despite the introduction of a flurry of bills after the decision. Northeastern University's Dr. Daynard is more skeptical. The court clearly provides compelling arguments, but you don't need the court for that. The Supreme Court doesn't set Congress' agenda. Without a groundswell of public opinion, it is not going to happen.