New York City\'s Beverage Ban

NEW YORK CITY'S BEVERAGE BAN

Last year, the New York City Board of Health passed a health measure initiated by Mayor Michael Bloomberg that banned the sale of sodas and other sugary beverages in quantities over 16 fluid ounces. The purpose of the ban was to reduce the societal harm attributable to the over-consumption of high calorie, high-sugar-content drinks that are known to contribute to the national problem of obesity. Last week, a New York trial court invalidated the law, referring to it as "arbitrary and capricious." The Mayor has indicated his intention to appeal the case and responded publicly to defend the measure. Mr. Bloomberg has previously been instrumental in promoting other similar health-related laws, such as the 2002 prohibition of smoking in bars and restaurants and the subsequent extension of that law to outdoor public venues. The Mayor has also succeeded in implementing legislation banning "trans-fats" and requiring certain kinds of restaurants to post nutritional information about their products.

Argument Supporting the Ban

The principle basis of the ban is that obesity is already a national epidemic and that the consumption of large quantities of sugary drinks like sodas plays a significant role in that regard. The rationale for using the authority of the Board of Health in this manner is simply that it is a legitimate health issue under the purview of that department and, therefore, properly regulated by this approach. In his public response to the court ruling, the Mayor pointed out that this law is no different in principle from his previous initiatives in connection with reducing the health risks posed by secondhand smoke and trans-fats. According to that point-of-view, since much of the financial burden of treating the medical consequences of obesity fall on public health agencies and come at the direct expense of public funds and other resources, it is perfectly appropriate to try to reduce the problem at its root cause.

Argument Opposing the Ban

The primary argument against the beverage ban is that it violates the fundamental autonomy and freedom of personal choice. Critics argue that in that respect, it is no different from prohibiting the consumption of a maximum amount of calories or banning sunbathing, because the former also contributes to obesity and because the latter is known to cause sin cancers that are sometimes deadly and that are also typically treated at the public's expense. The other main argument against the measure is that the Mayor circumvented the legislative process by implementing it through the Department of Health instead of through the City Council.

The Basis of the Legal Decision