A federal appeals court on Thursday blocked a San Francisco law requiring health warnings on advertisements for soda and other sugary drinks in a victory for beverage and retail groups that sued to block the ordinance, the AP reports. 

The law violates constitutionally protected commercial speech, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals said in a unanimous ruling. 

The judges granted a preliminary injunction that prevents the ordinance from taking effect and kicked the case back to a lower court. The required warnings "offend plaintiffs' First Amendment rights by chilling protected speech," the judges wrote. 

The American Beverage Association, which represents Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and others, joined retail and advertising organizations to argue in court that the rules should be blocked.

"We are pleased with this ruling, which affirms there are more appropriate ways to help people manage their overall sugar consumption than through mandatory and misleading messages," the beverage association said in a statement. 

The law passed by San Francisco in 2015 would require beverage advertisements within city limits to include warnings that drinking sugary drinks contribute to health issues. 

The judges wrote that the city "may be commended for aiming to address serious and growing public health problems." 

But they agreed that beverage companies were likely to suffer irreparable harm if the law went into effect because the warnings would drown out the ads' main messages. A three-judge panel of the circuit court blocked the law in 2017. The entire 11-judge panel said last year it would rehear the case. 

QUESTIONS:
1) Illustrate why San Francisco’s law on soda and sugary drink advertisements are considered “unconstitutional.”

2) Why did the American Beverage Association appeal for the revocation of the regulation? How did the involved companies feel about the court ruling?

3) How did the judges feel about the city’s focus on the public health? How likely will the law cause “irreparable harm” to the soda industry?

4) Instead of stern advertisement guidelines, what other impositions can the city do to ensure the people’s good health? Cite one.

5) Share your thoughts on the effectiveness and impact of implementing sugar tax instead. 

VOCABULARY/EXPRESSION:
Commercial speech - the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.