Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 230.0

529US1

Unit: $U36

[09-26-01 08:36:38] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 120 (2000)

155

Opinion of the Court

Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act even though smoking, I think,
has been widely recognized as being harmful to human
health.” Rural Development, Agriculture, and Related
Agencies Appropriations for 1989: Hearings before a Sub-
committee of the House Committee on Appropriations, 100th
Cong., 2d Sess., 409 (1988). At the same hearing, the FDA’s
General Counsel testiﬁed that “what is fairly important in
FDA law is whether a product has a therapeutic purpose,”
and “[c]igarettes themselves are not used for a therapeutic
purpose as that concept is ordinarily understood.”
Id., at
410. Between 1987 and 1989, Congress considered three
more bills that would have amended the FDCA to grant the
FDA jurisdiction to regulate tobacco products. See H. R.
3294, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. (1987); H. R. 1494, 101st Cong.,
1st Sess. (1989); S. 769, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. (1989). As
before, Congress rejected the proposals.
In 1992, Congress
instead adopted the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health
Administration Reorganization Act, Pub. L. 102–321, § 202,
106 Stat. 394 (codiﬁed at 42 U. S. C. § 300x et seq.), which
creates incentives for States to regulate the retail sale of
tobacco products by making States’ receipt of certain block
grants contingent on their prohibiting the sale of tobacco
products to minors.

Taken together, these actions by Congress over the past
35 years preclude an interpretation of the FDCA that grants
the FDA jurisdiction to regulate tobacco products. We do
not rely on Congress’ failure to act—its consideration and
rejection of bills that would have given the FDA this author-
ity—in reaching this conclusion.
Indeed, this is not a case
of simple inaction by Congress that purportedly represents
its acquiescence in an agency’s position. To the contrary,
Congress has enacted several statutes addressing the partic-
ular subject of tobacco and health, creating a distinct regula-
tory scheme for cigarettes and smokeless tobacco.
In doing
so, Congress has been aware of tobacco’s health hazards and
It has also enacted this legisla-
its pharmacological effects.