Blog

When does Congress ever consider the constitutional implications of its legislation?

Certainly not when placing grotesque warning labels on cigarettes! Judge Leon granted summary judgment in favor of the tobacco plaintiffs on the warning label case.

Leon wrote in today’s opinion that the labels in question “are neither factual nor accurate.” He cited one of the labels that shows a body on an autopsy table as an example. “For example, the image of the body on an autopsy table suggests that smoking leads to autopsies; but the Government provides no support to show that autopsies are a common consequence of smoking,” he wrote. “Indeed, it makes no attempt to do so.”

“Put simply, the Government fails to convey any factual information supported by evidence about the actual health consequences of smoking through its use of these graphic images,” Leon wrote.

Leon added that it was unfortunate that the federal government hadn’t considered other alternatives to the labels requirement “that are easily less restrictive and burdensome for plaintiffs, yet would still allow the Government to educate the public on the health risks of smoking without unconstitutionally compelling speech.” Examples included shrinking the size of the proposed labels, picking graphics based in fact “rather than gruesome images designed to disgust the consumer,” increasing cigarette taxes or improving efforts to stop sales to minors.

In a footnote, the court distinguishes between a “Warning” and “Deter[ring] individuals from purchasing the packages.” He doesn’t even think pictures of an autopsy are warnings. They are “Graphic images.”

And some news about it’s main competitor, Rocket Lawyer:

This business, which has served more than 1 million customers, is profitable but growth is relatively slow.

LegalZoom launched a new business last year that connects people with attorneys for advice and charges a monthly fee.

While the company has been around for more than a decade, investment in this niche of the legal industry has increased recently.

Rocket Lawyer, a competitor to LegalZoom, said in August that it raised $18.5 million from venture capital firms including August Capital and Google Ventures, part of Google Inc

(GOOG.O).

Rocket Lawyer said in August that it was the fastest-growing online legal service, with visits to the company’s website up more than 100 percent year over year. Rocket Lawyer also offers access to attorneys for a monthly fee.

Reason.TV has a nice interview:

This is scary.

Architecture student André Ford has presented a very radical solution increase the efficiency and humaneness in raising poultry. Under his plan, birds would have their frontal cortexes surgically severed, rendering the animals permanently unconscious with no zero sensory input while maintaining their lower brain functions—breathing and such—so that they continue to grow.

The form and function of a chicken plant would change drastically as well. The birds would be suspended and immobilized from hanging racks. Their feet would be removed (not going to be doing much walking in their state) and the animals would receive nutrients through an esophageal tube. A second tube would remove waste—Matrix-style. The birds could literally be stacked—quadrupling the density from one chicken every 10 square feet to four—quietly growing until they’re large enough to be harvested.

What could go wrong?

“We need to be realists about technology,” he said. The future, most easily, belongs to “ultra connected people” who can embrace the future of technology, but the majority of people do not fall into that category, he said as he kicked off a speech about what he sees as the role of technology in the world today, and carefully suggested what role Google could play in the game.