The success of the citizen suit: protecting consumers from inaccurate food labeling by amending the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

IF 0.3 4区 医学 Q4 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Food and drug law journal Pub Date : 2013-01-01
James Springer
{"title":"The success of the citizen suit: protecting consumers from inaccurate food labeling by amending the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.","authors":"James Springer","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (\"FDCA\"), amended in 1990 by the Nutrition Education and Labeling Act (\"NLEA\"), established a national framework for the administration and promulgation of uniform food labeling standards. Specifically, the NLEA created affirmative obligations for the food--requiring detailed disclosure of food content and strict adherence to regulations governing the use of health and nutritional claims on food packaging. To accomplish these goals, Congress tasked the Food and Drug Administration (\"FDA\") with the sole responsibility of the enforcement of these new requirements. Under the statutory framework of the FDCA, the United States Supreme Court (\"Court\") has held that there is no private right of action, of which extended to the enforcement of NLEA standards. This interpretation has left individuals with no federal outlet for relief in the enforcement of federal food labeling standards. Adherence to this interpretation is especially concerning when the FDA currently faces exponential growth in administrative responsibilities while simultaneously experiencing employment reduction, a $206 million \"Sequester,\" and a recent government-wide shutdown. As a result, the American people are left to depend on an Agency that is struggling with drastic resource reduction while being accountable for ever increasing enforcement responsibilities. To ensure consumer protection, this Article argues that Congress should amend the FDCA to include a citizen suit provision in order to provide individuals with a right of private action for the enforcement of NLEA standards. Borrowing from the successes realized under similar citizen suit provisions found in environmental legislation, this Article argues that a citizen suit provision is amendable to the FDCA and would relieve fiscal pressures, strengthen the current enforcement framework of the FDCA, encourage more robust enforcement by the FDA and states, and ensure uniform interpretation of NLEA standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":12282,"journal":{"name":"Food and drug law journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food and drug law journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA"), amended in 1990 by the Nutrition Education and Labeling Act ("NLEA"), established a national framework for the administration and promulgation of uniform food labeling standards. Specifically, the NLEA created affirmative obligations for the food--requiring detailed disclosure of food content and strict adherence to regulations governing the use of health and nutritional claims on food packaging. To accomplish these goals, Congress tasked the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") with the sole responsibility of the enforcement of these new requirements. Under the statutory framework of the FDCA, the United States Supreme Court ("Court") has held that there is no private right of action, of which extended to the enforcement of NLEA standards. This interpretation has left individuals with no federal outlet for relief in the enforcement of federal food labeling standards. Adherence to this interpretation is especially concerning when the FDA currently faces exponential growth in administrative responsibilities while simultaneously experiencing employment reduction, a $206 million "Sequester," and a recent government-wide shutdown. As a result, the American people are left to depend on an Agency that is struggling with drastic resource reduction while being accountable for ever increasing enforcement responsibilities. To ensure consumer protection, this Article argues that Congress should amend the FDCA to include a citizen suit provision in order to provide individuals with a right of private action for the enforcement of NLEA standards. Borrowing from the successes realized under similar citizen suit provisions found in environmental legislation, this Article argues that a citizen suit provision is amendable to the FDCA and would relieve fiscal pressures, strengthen the current enforcement framework of the FDCA, encourage more robust enforcement by the FDA and states, and ensure uniform interpretation of NLEA standards.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公民诉讼的成功:通过修改《联邦食品、药品和化妆品法》保护消费者免受不准确食品标签的侵害。
《联邦食品、药品和化妆品法》(“FDCA”)于1990年由《营养教育和标签法》(“NLEA”)修订,为管理和颁布统一的食品标签标准建立了国家框架。具体而言,《国家食品法》为食品规定了肯定义务——要求详细披露食品成分,并严格遵守有关在食品包装上使用健康和营养声明的规定。为了实现这些目标,国会责成食品和药物管理局(“FDA”)全权负责执行这些新要求。在FDCA的法定框架下,美国最高法院(“法院”)认为不存在私人诉讼权利,其延伸到NLEA标准的执行。这一解释使得个人在执行联邦食品标签标准时没有联邦救济渠道。当FDA目前面临行政责任的指数级增长,同时经历裁员、2.06亿美元的“自动减支”和最近的政府全面关闭时,坚持这一解释尤其值得关注。其结果是,美国人民只能依靠一个在资源急剧减少的情况下挣扎的机构,同时还要对日益增加的执法责任负责。为保障消费者权益,本文认为国会应修改FDCA,纳入公民诉讼条款,以便为个人提供执行NLEA标准的私人诉讼权利。借鉴环境立法中类似的公民诉讼条款所取得的成功,本文认为公民诉讼条款可以修改FDCA,并将缓解财政压力,加强FDCA的现行执行框架,鼓励FDA和各州更有力地执行,并确保NLEA标准的统一解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Food and drug law journal
Food and drug law journal 医学-食品科技
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
50.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The Food and Drug Law Journal is a peer-reviewed quarterly devoted to the analysis of legislation, regulations, court decisions, and public policies affecting industries regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and related agencies and authorities, including the development, manufacture, marketing, and use of drugs, medical devices, biologics, food, dietary supplements, cosmetics, veterinary, tobacco, and cannabis-derived products. Building on more than 70 years of scholarly discourse, since 2015, the Journal is published in partnership with the Georgetown University Law Center and the O’Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law. All members can access the Journal online. Each member organization and most individual memberships (except for government, student, and Emeritus members) receive one subscription to the print Journal.
期刊最新文献
Life, Liberty, [and the Pursuit of Happiness]: Medical Marijuana Regulation in Historical Context Implementing a Public Health Perspective in FDA Drug Regulation Commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the 1976 Medical Device Amendments. FDA-Required Tobacco Product Inserts & Onserts–and the First Amendment. Proposed Industry Best Practices in Development and Marketing of Medical Foods for the Management of Chronic Conditions and Diseases while Awaiting Regulation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1