A Hawaii federal court has ruled that a Maui ban on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is preempted by the Plant Protection Act and therefore invalid. Robert Ito Farm, Inc. v. Cty. of Maui, No. 14-0582 (D. Haw., order entered June 30, 2015). The decision begins with an introduction clarifying that the court recognizes the importance of the questions of whether GMOs pose risks, noting, “This order is not an attempt by this court to pass judgment on any benefit or detriment posted by [genetic engineering (GE)] activities or GMOs.” The Maui prohibition on GMO cultivation or propagation passed in November 2014 and supporters of the initiative filed a lawsuit for a declaratory judgment shortly thereafter. Detractors then filed a lawsuit the following day seeking to invalidate the ban. After disposing with preliminary motions filed by a supporter organization, Shaka Movement, the court turned to the issue of preemption. The federal…
Category Archives Issue 571
Diageo Great Britain Ltd. reportedly plans to appeal the U.K. Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA’s) decision to ban a Smirnoff ® advertisement for allegedly violating the marketing rules for social responsibility in alcohol marketing. Upholding its own complaint, which claimed that the ad in question linked social success to alcohol consumption, ASA found that “the ad’s presentation implied that before the visitor asked for an alcoholic drink, the bar was cold and uninviting and that once his drink had been ordered, the bar changed and became livelier and more fun.” Diageo disputed this interpretation, arguing that the TV spot showed the bar “tilting” to filter out the elements that gave it an unwelcoming atmosphere. According to the ruling’s summary of Diageo’s response, “The tilt acted as a physical division within the ad and where the pretentious items in the first scene were filtered out and the bar now had a warm…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published modifications to the 2013 Food Code based on recommendations made by industry, regulators and other stakeholders during the 2014 Biennial Meeting of the Conference for Food Protection. The Food Code and its Supplement offer the federal agency’s best advice for minimizing the risk of foodborne illness in retail and foodservice venues. Changes to the 2013 iteration of the Code include: (i) clarification of what information should be included in a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point Plan required by a regulatory authority; (ii) clarification of the difference between Typhoid Fever and non-typhoidal Salmonellosis when reporting illness and the exclusion and restriction of sick food employees; and (iii) expansion of the duties of the “Person in Charge” to include oversight of the routine monitoring of food temperatures during hot and cold holding. FDA plans to issue its next complete revision of the…
Citing stakeholder concerns over insufficient time to achieve appropriate implementation, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has extended by one year the compliance date for its controversial menu-labeling rule from December 1, 2015, until December 1, 2016. The new requirements apply to restaurants and similar retail food establishments with more than 20 locations, as well as food facilities in movie theaters, amusement parks and other entertainment venues. According to a statement from FDA Deputy Commissioner Michael Taylor, the agency will continue its ongoing discussions with covered establishments and plans to release draft guidance in August 2015 that answers frequently asked questions about complying with the rule. See FDA Statement, July 9, 2015. Issue 571
12
