Court halts New York City soda restrictions
March 11th, 2013
04:00 PM ET
Share this on:

New York City's restrictions on the sale of sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces won't go into effect Tuesday after a state judge declared them "arbitrary and capricious."

"The court finds that the regulation herein is laden with exceptions based on economic and political concerns," Justice Milton Tingling wrote in the decision.

The American Beverage Association and other business associations originally filed the lawsuit, claiming, among other things, that the rules would disproportionately hurt small, minority-owned businesses.

Read more about the decision

Twitter reaction bubbled up quickly:

Previously:
Bloomberg's visionary move against obesity
Controversy fizzing over Bloomberg's soda ban
Prepping for NYC’s ban on large sugary drinks
Groups: NYC soda ban unfair to small, minority-owned businesses

Posted by:
Filed under: Soda Ban


soundoff (70 Responses)
  1. Jones sabo you'll be able to brew a lot more local

    I did however expertise a few technical issues using this site, as I experienced to reload the website a lot of times previous to I could get it to load properly. Jones sabo you'll be able to brew a lot more local http://badasscollegestudent.net/dolph/blogs/entry/Jones-sabo-you-ll-be-able-to-brew-a-lot-more-locale-within-your-wardrobe-dealing-with-brand-new-ones

    April 16, 2013 at 12:28 am | Reply
  2. Dantos

    What I really hate, is that all this time and energy is spent trying to ban things, but then we have to put in an exception for grocery stores, oh and some other places too, and we cant have ALL sugary drinks banned like this certain ones have to be let through, and well of course other beverages that are high in calories have to be left untouched, because well, politics.

    It just turns the idea of "being for the public good" into "I wanna score points with my faction's base, while hoping noone notices that its actually completely ineffectual"

    March 13, 2013 at 8:48 am | Reply
  3. YankeeDoodle

    Enforce the laws already passed that address violent crimes instead of playing paper tiger. You weren't elected to bully the public. These worthless bans are self-gratifying because you can't apply yourself to the crime epidemic. You lawmakers are continuously doing "silly" things to avoid the real problem in society – VIOLENCE. But still you want to punish the law abiding public in some form.

    March 13, 2013 at 6:42 am | Reply
    • Stormy

      2013..... the year the USA banned itself.

      March 13, 2013 at 9:22 am | Reply
  4. North Dallas Don

    Mayor Bloomberg and his cronies should never be allowed to call themselves "Americans" again. They are elitists who use their influence and money to crush American values.

    March 13, 2013 at 2:16 am | Reply
    • Mel

      I wasn't aware large quantities of soda were core American values.

      March 15, 2013 at 10:58 am | Reply
  5. Pete

    I really don't see the big deal. They aren't preventing you from drinking sugary drinks or even getting getting free refills. All it does is makes you think twice about about chugging a two liter (Big Gulp) with your lunch. Do you really want to drink 800 calories in one sitting?

    March 12, 2013 at 10:53 pm | Reply
  6. And the Raven Said...

    For all of you who voice your abhorrence towards those who are overweight, and how it will affect your health insurance costs, I ask you to examine your own situations. How many children do you have that we're brought into this world with the costs being covered with insurance? Have any of you had a sports related injury that insurance paid for? How much calorie and alcohol laden beer do you drink while sitting on the couch watching ball games? Do you ever drive over the speed limit? Do you talk on your cell phones while driving? I hope that none of the critical, self-center people out there ever face a serious and costly health crisis. Otherwise, your fellow critics will demand to know in what way you were so irresponsible as to put a ding in their insurance costs!

    March 12, 2013 at 6:44 pm | Reply
    • VladT

      A logical response

      Aaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      March 13, 2013 at 7:57 am | Reply
  7. Kate

    Bottom line is-no one should have the right to tell us what we can eat & drink-period!

    March 12, 2013 at 4:34 pm | Reply
    • Shane

      If cities/counties can tell you that you cannot buy/sell alcohol, then they legally can do the same with softdrinks. That's the bottom line fatty lards.

      March 12, 2013 at 6:12 pm | Reply
      • tionna

        i think what shane said is true why gett mad over soda drinks thats crazy think about whats healthy for you. now days americans complain about every thing. get over it this would not be a problem if people take better care of their selfs. thanks for you time. :D

        March 12, 2013 at 9:44 pm | Reply
      • Pete

        Its true. Obesity has killed more people than than alcohol. Why not tax/regulate sugary foods and drinks like alcohol.

        March 12, 2013 at 10:39 pm | Reply
      • reality

        Do you even realize what country you are in? Let me think for a minute, does a person have the right to buy a soft drink even if it may not be good for him. Lets think about this real hard. Why limit it to 16oz? Why not 12? Why not also limit all other foods that are equally as bad.

        How many things do you buy in a week that are not good for you?

        Lets start with outlawing all foods that can increase your odds of being subjected to state sponsored medical treatments, which is where this is all aimed at.

        So, hamburgers are out. Hot dogs are out. White bread is out. Anything with a high preponderance of processed sugar is out, because you could induce diabetes as you get aged, or get fat. Your fat intake must be restricted. You cooking oil type must be restricted. Baskin-Robbins is virtually out of business, as are almost all donut shops. Most desserts should be outlawed, as they have to be just as bad as a 20oz soda. Alcohol and tobacco products are gone. Cheescake factory is in trouble.

        Oh wait, it might be better to tailer foods allowed to buy to the caloric and age of the customer – so some are allowed what others are not. So, we could be selling product with age restrictions. Too old to buy some things.

        After all, the entire purpose of this is to get people off the rolls of medical treatments and medications that the state (or city) must use their budget to pay for. Maybe the state can issue Ration cards. You are allowed to buy the equivalent of 12oz of red wine per day within a monthly period. So your weekly allotment is 94 oz of wine maximum. One time buy per year of three times that (in case you have a party).

        Might be worth thinking about that – just maybe – we should not be paying for every medical treatment in the world when we cannot afford it as a society. Or better yet, even if we CAN afford it – why should we pay for it? God forbid that some people eat bad, and have medical problems that they just need to either (1) Live with it (or not), or (2) change their diet and lifestyle. It's called choice. Let them make their choice and live with their choice and stop being a nanny government.

        Oh wait, another possible solution – if you have full medical coverage – AND are of the correct age, only THEN could you buy foods that are not good for the body as judged by the FDA.

        Yea, lets bring on the nanny socialism state.

        March 13, 2013 at 8:26 am | Reply
        • danielle

          You are right . I am not against to educate people what is good for theirs health, but not to impose, that is dictatorial (see China, Romania before 1989...) and i would like to mention i am not a consumer of any sugary beverage .

          March 13, 2013 at 12:05 pm |
  8. soican

    NEW LAW – all persons must wipe from back to front not front to back.

    March 12, 2013 at 4:12 pm | Reply
    • Lagos

      Also, in order for enforcement of this law that will reduce everyone's health insurance costs by reducing instances of female urinary tract infections, government-controlled toilet cameras are now mandatory.

      March 12, 2013 at 5:03 pm | Reply
      • Lagos

        Whoops, guess this would increase the instance of said infections. Sexist law!

        March 12, 2013 at 5:04 pm | Reply
    • rkidd

      I tried that , it works, next time I'll try it with paper.

      March 12, 2013 at 5:17 pm | Reply
  9. Urof

    Bloomberg is a moron.

    I can go in and buy 4 dozen donuts and eat them while I'm standing there, but I can't have a coffee that has 4 teaspoons of sugar in it.

    Good logic.

    March 12, 2013 at 4:05 pm | Reply
  10. ug

    LOL!it proves that the gov. can't tell you what to eat or drink...LOL! poor little nanny doomberg...

    March 12, 2013 at 3:24 pm | Reply
  11. Mark

    At the end of the day it's up to us to avoid doing things that are bad for our health, but don't think for one second that drinking a gallon of sugar water with added chemicals a day and getting sick doesn't affect anyone but yourself. When you wind up with diabetes and need medical care for the rest of your life, all of your fellow health insurance premium payers will have to pay more and then of course your kids will be happy to take care of you after you go blind and have your feet amputated. Bottom line...you shouldn't need a law to keep you from being dumb.

    March 12, 2013 at 2:30 pm | Reply
    • Simm7

      I agree, everyone should be entitled to choose how they live their lives, provided they do not infringe upon the liberty of others. That being said, my insurance premiums should not go up because someone else wants to be a fatty and need all sorts of diabetes meds/supplies or needs an amputation. If you want to be one of those, good luck, but there should be a high risk insurance plan for those who are more prone to having health issues and a low risk one to REWARD those who take the initiative to work for a healthier life.

      March 12, 2013 at 4:38 pm | Reply
  12. Sir Robin

    Yay. Down with fascists.

    March 12, 2013 at 1:15 pm | Reply
  13. Tigerflower

    The ridiculous part is that there are those out there who really believes this statute would have an impact on obesity. It doesn't limit access to sugary drinks or in any way, shape or form encourage people to consume less of them. People who want the drinks are obviously going to order 2 if they want a larger serving and in some cases this would actually mean increased consumption of sugary beverages. Srsly New York?!! LOL

    March 12, 2013 at 1:13 pm | Reply
  14. nonnie

    I agree that all this sugar is a direct reflection of a persons overall health. But what about all the skinny friends I have that drink can after can? The blog seems to be targeting fat people. Are we going to have to start weighing ourselves at the counter before we order? Then they'll give us our own individual menu.

    March 12, 2013 at 1:08 pm | Reply
  15. RedskinsFan

    The law is wrong and infringes on individual freedoms.. but I understand the point behind it. Seriously... a 72 oz. Fizzonator from Sheets is more than a 2L bottle of soda. It doesn't mean it should be illegal, but given the fact that a lot of us tend to be very stupid monkeys when it comes to limiting things like the amount of cheese or other high calorie foods we eat, I get the point behind the law. People need to learn what a portion size is... or learn that they will get to the point where they look like the late night crowd at a Wal-Mart since those are the only clothes that will stretch to cover those Gluteous Maximi....

    March 12, 2013 at 1:02 pm | Reply
  16. palintwit

    I'd like to see a ban on all things Palin, starting with that oaf Sarah.

    March 12, 2013 at 12:17 pm | Reply
    • Liam

      I wanna see her naked.

      March 12, 2013 at 12:29 pm | Reply
      • Bobbie

        ROOWWWRRR!!

        March 12, 2013 at 4:50 pm | Reply
    • judgement

      You right, you are a twit. Move on to some other discussion where your intellect can shine. There must be a conversation somewhere going on about bouncing quarters off your stomach to see how close you can get to an empty cup somewhere.

      March 13, 2013 at 8:31 am | Reply
  17. JFlowers

    Remember, this was not a law that was "passed". This was rule put out by the NYC commision that controls resturants, a commision that reports only to Bloomberg. So it was one man's egotistical opinion that he knows better rather than a law passed by the representatives of the people for the betterment of all.

    In the end, it was a stupid and very arbitrary rule, which is why the court correctly overturned it. You don't want your kids drinking super big gulps of CafPow, be an adult and a parent!

    March 12, 2013 at 10:17 am | Reply
  18. Sunny

    Pretty silly law they tried to pass... They have nothing else to deal with in NYC???

    March 12, 2013 at 10:08 am | Reply
    • Carl

      But just to be clear, they didn't try to "pass" a "law". They tried to dictate their own executive rules outside of the normal lawmaking process.

      March 12, 2013 at 1:37 pm | Reply
  19. Nicole

    I have no problem with the limitations on size of soft drinks AS LONG AS they limit the amount of kids you can have when you are on Medicaid.

    March 12, 2013 at 9:45 am | Reply
    • judgement

      What about if you are on unemployment? Or what about food stamps? Or what about homeless?

      So the arguement is no large drinks if you have too many kids? Or is it no large drinks if you are receiving money from the state or federal government for a medical condition?

      What if the medical condition doesn't relate to your body's condition from weight or blood issues? Maybe you have a stress or long-term damage from a medical incident?

      March 13, 2013 at 8:35 am | Reply
  20. M T Nest

    Do they give free re-fills? 😄

    March 12, 2013 at 9:21 am | Reply
  21. sickofliberalintrusion

    Someone please stuff Mayor Bloomberg into a 20 oz cup an cover him with ice.

    March 12, 2013 at 9:13 am | Reply
  22. Debbie

    Next we will have a class-action lawsuit of obese people suing Coca Cola and Pepsi for MAKING them drink it! Come on people, take responsibility for your own actions–grow up, be adults, or someone WILL have to make all your personal decisions for you. I know that's really the goal of the Obama Administration. They think we're all adolescents that need to look to Mom and Dad (the government) for discipline and direction. Everyone knows if you over-indulge in anything, you have to pay a price, but, ultimately, it is YOUR choice. That's what freedom in America (not Communism or Socialism ala Obama) is all about. Amen & Amen!

    March 12, 2013 at 9:12 am | Reply
    • So Debbie

      There is nothing I'd like more than to rip into your political statement, but this is a food blog. I understand why he made this decision, but I think it is a pretty stupid way to go. There is nothing stopping a person from buying more than one drink at a time, so you are not preventing anything. Maybe a better way to go would be to run psa's about food addictions and your health. Education is the key, not banning an oversized drink.

      March 12, 2013 at 10:10 am | Reply
      • nonnie

        Good point!! If I wanted more pop then I guess I'll buy two. So many bigger things in NYC.

        March 12, 2013 at 1:00 pm | Reply
      • sadbuttrue

        Its sad that most of what she says is still correct though, no matter the political persuasion. Reality is – if you push forth policies to regulate people to enforce healthful lifestyles on them despite what they want to do – that is one of the typical definitions of 'nanny' state and a policy that many socialist governments believe in. Historically it is not a belief from the american past. After all, their governments pay for a large portion of what the poor and indigent need for the to survive on the state, and anything that can cut down on the costs is good for the budget. Better budget, more social programs possible. Its all the economy of the poor.

        March 13, 2013 at 8:43 am | Reply
  23. KieranH

    They took our jobs!!!! Oh wait.....that was our obnoxiously large sodas........

    March 12, 2013 at 7:48 am | Reply
  24. Mom

    What to drink, who to marry, when to turn the clocks back, what else do they want to micromanage? Maybe they should institute a mandatory exercise hour? Turn off all TV broadcasts at ten pm so that we don't stay up late. Maybe stop childbearing after two kids? America, home of the brave, land of the unreasonably constrained.

    March 12, 2013 at 6:49 am | Reply
  25. don0011

    You know when an official has been in office too long, when you wants to cut your soda intake.

    March 12, 2013 at 6:24 am | Reply
  26. johnny johnston

    no one but a carb addict fat pig needs 18 table spoonfuls of sugar, get real! Its a simple but legal carb addiction ramped up by the food industry who makes big $ off gluttony and the medical field has to deal with it. Good for the coffin industry though.I say make them drink 49 oz drinks to rid the world of idiots, especially the teenagers. This is why the U.S. is a nation of pigs the last 20 years, slurp it up hogs.

    March 12, 2013 at 4:38 am | Reply
    • Sunny

      How do you really feel?

      March 12, 2013 at 10:10 am | Reply
    • Justin H

      Maybe it is the libertarian in me, but let the fatties do what they like. But I also believe they should have to deal with the consequences of their bad decisions too.

      March 12, 2013 at 12:53 pm | Reply
    • the arguement

      So, the arguement here is that if they are going to get fat from drinking this drink – they should be allowed to do it because they are fat pigs anyway? That is an interesting arguement, but the nanny state does not believe that is an option because they will have to pay for the medical bills related to the aging of the fat people.

      So, the only option is – you get a yearly blood test, have your body fat measured, compare all that to your age – and are issued a Ration card for food & drinks that are bad for you. You get so many points worth of product each month based on your yearly checkup.

      And, even better – your insurance company will have access to your cards purchasing history. The more points you use up, the higher your health insurance costs.

      If you want a discount, you need to get a your genetic makeup mapped out so you can prove that, historically, your body should be able to handle it better than the average – so you now get a 10% discount on your insurance.

      Yea, can't wait for that.

      March 13, 2013 at 8:49 am | Reply
  27. ihaveGuns

    Give us coke or give us our death We need to get that "guy" out what does he care if we drink "sugary drinks"?
    He probably is hiding some under his house!

    March 12, 2013 at 3:22 am | Reply
  28. ironwolf56

    So the reason is that it might hurt businesses owned by minorities not...ya know the more logical conclusion that it's unconstitutional in the extreme? *Facepalm* Even when NY has a half-decent idea it's wrapped in far-left idiocy.

    March 11, 2013 at 8:34 pm | Reply
  29. Jokes_on-You

    Booooooooooooooooooooooo!!

    We NEED this ban,It will be BETTER for everyone!!!!! All these fat people,all they do is drink soda.We need to make sure that it is limnited in quanties

    March 11, 2013 at 8:25 pm | Reply
    • nonnie

      It NEVER will be just buy two. Duh

      March 12, 2013 at 1:03 pm | Reply
  30. salamagmapineda

    Reblogged this on salamagma.com.

    March 11, 2013 at 8:19 pm | Reply
  31. Mike

    Well, New Yorkers elected him, so they got who they voted for. Don't like it? Elect someone else.

    March 11, 2013 at 6:51 pm | Reply
  32. fuyuko

    What is to prevent people from ordering 2 drinks? I mean SRSLY.

    March 11, 2013 at 5:33 pm | Reply
  33. Truth™

    Will the "Thin Mint" be targeted next?

    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXH_12QWWg8&w=640&h=390]

    March 11, 2013 at 4:50 pm | Reply
  34. Smokey

    If you thought that the nanny-state-ism on guns, drugs, and smoking was bad, this has to be close to the apex. Coming from the country that brought us prohibition, it shouldn't be a surprise I guess. I thought NYC was the global center for free-market economics? But the government moves to limit serving sizes for cola, c'mon, if you think America is free you are living in a dream world. Ridiculous stuff like this is just the visible part of the iceberg.

    March 11, 2013 at 4:49 pm | Reply
    • ironwolf56

      Well NYC is more the world leader of snobbery. Soda and cigarettes; those are things the lower classes enjoy, so the intelligentsia want those banned to control the "rabble" a bit better. Notice how smoking bans never seem to touch cigars? And you can bet that no one is ever going to put forth a limit on the size of the wine bottle you can order with your Sino-Dutch-Turkish fusion 200 dollar meal.

      March 11, 2013 at 10:49 pm | Reply
  35. tee

    Now if we can get them to outlaw the AK47s the shop owners are using to FORCE people to buy 24-32 oz drinks, all will be good.

    The Mayor is an idiot.

    tee

    March 11, 2013 at 4:47 pm | Reply
  36. Sharon Marie

    Wow, that was riveting. Well, it is Monday.

    March 11, 2013 at 4:45 pm | Reply
  37. objectivist51

    Too many rules and laws to strip the people if their individual rights. Do away with all laws that infringe on individual rights like seat belts, helmets and so on. Now can they get back to the real problems? Doubtful.

    March 11, 2013 at 4:41 pm | Reply
  38. chris

    This is America, freedom of choice!! Health risk factors are already announced and acknowledged if choose to drink sugary drinks. Banning supersized sugary drinks is closely related to being a socialist. Let us decide for ourselves. It is THAT simple and the only time I buy supersized drink is unsweetened ice tea with lemon. Pop, I just drink out of the can. Common sense PLEASE!!!

    March 11, 2013 at 4:28 pm | Reply
  39. ZardaBaBy

    As long as Gloomberg rules, I will withhold my stupid and naive tourist money from NYC. I cant wait until he is out of office so I can again be a complete midwest goober in the most awesome city in the world. I miss ya NYC!!!!!!

    March 11, 2013 at 4:25 pm | Reply
  40. naes

    so i bought 17 one cups for nothing?

    March 11, 2013 at 4:25 pm | Reply
    • ZardaBaBy

      I almost peed my pants laughing at that! Thanks :)

      March 11, 2013 at 4:26 pm | Reply
  41. Mickey

    If a person wants a large drink, they will just order two. This is so rediculous about banning a large drink. I think there are more important things to worry about, like helping people recover from Sandy.

    March 11, 2013 at 4:21 pm | Reply
    • ZardaBaBy

      We are talking about the mayor that made dam**d sure that Wall Street was taken care of and running after Sandy and told the rest of NY to yuck it.

      March 11, 2013 at 4:28 pm | Reply
  42. Mary

    This is just so stupid. Crime is out of control, people are going hungry, the infrastructure is falling down but NY is wasting community resources on this stupid big drink issue.

    March 11, 2013 at 4:19 pm | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

Pinterest
 
| Part of
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,414 other followers