Health News
Main Menu
July 30, 1998
BY CAM SIMPSON FEDERAL COURT REPORTER
A federal judge on Wednesday shot down a popular Chicago ordinance banning billboards advertising alcohol and cigarettes.
Senior U.S. District Judge Milton I. Shadur said his legal opinion wasn't aimed at minimizing ``the enormous costs in health--or, to be more plain, in deaths--that are annually sustained because of smoking.''
Nonetheless, Shadur said, the ordinance collapses under legal scrutiny.
The billboard ban for most parts of the city was approved by the City Council last fall on a 44-1 vote. It was not implemented, however, because of the pending legal challenge, said Jennifer Hoyle, a spokeswoman for the city's Law Department.
Mayor Daley said last year that the ban's sweeping nature was due to advertisers' failure to listen to community concerns about their targeting of areas heavily populated by minorities.
But Shadur, siding with an advertising industry group that sued after the ordinance took effect, said federal law bars state or local governments from going after cigarette advertising based on concerns about ``smoking and health.''
Congress enacted the federal law in 1969 when it strengthened warning label requirements for cigarette advertising.
The city tried to argue that its ban wasn't aimed at health concerns. Instead, the city said, the goal of the advertising ban was to foster law enforcement by discouraging minors from illegally buying cigarettes.
But Shadur found that statements in the ordinance itself contradicted that claim. In addition, Shadur said, several speeches by aldermen clearly identified health concerns as the true target.
Of the city's defense, the judge said, ``All of those efforts turn out--to make a bad pun--to be nothing more than a smoke screen.''
The Rev. Michael L. Pfleger, a leader in the fight against the billboards, said Shadur ``obviously doesn't have that problem in his neighborhood.''
Pfleger said a federal court in Baltimore has upheld a similar ordinance.
``I'm hoping the city is going to appeal,'' he said. ``We are not going to tolerate this saturation of billboards. If it goes back to painting billboards, it goes back to painting billboards.''
Ald. Terry Peterson (17th), who co-sponsored the ordinance, said, ``We definitely plan to appeal.''
In challenging the ban, advertisers also argued that the ordinance violated their First Amendment right to free speech. Shadur said he didn't have to address free-speech arguments because the ban went up in smoke once he determined that it was at odds with federal law.
But he left the door open for the city to try the booze prohibition again in a separate ordinance.
Back to News Page
