April 24, 2008
Another Big Fat Delay for NYC Calorie Rules
A federal appeals judge has issued a delay on enforcement of the new law that would require NYC restaurants with 15 or more establishments nationwide to prominently display calorie information for all foods and beverages. The rules had been scheduled to take effect on Saturday; the new delay will last until Tuesday, when the three-member appeals court will formally consider an even longer delay.
The New York State Restaurant Association is arguing that the rules are a violation of their First Amendment rights and would run counter to the federal Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, which lets restaurants decide how to present nutrition information, if at all. A spokesperson for the Health Department said, “Each month its implementation is delayed, another 10 million meals are served at chain restaurants in New York City without point of purchase calorie information, further worsening the obesity epidemic and its related health risks.”
A number of establishments like Chipotle have already begun voluntarily displaying the calorie info, but some think their stats are highly misleading.
Photo by Vidiot.
|
Subway does it voluntarily. When I eat there I actually use it.
In a perfect world, they would be laughed out of court.. there simply is no first amendment prohibition against requiring disclosure of information in a commercial transaction.
I only did a quick reading of the FDCA (as amended by NCLA), and while there is federal preemption, it appears to allow State and local jurisdictions to require nutritional labeling of restaurant food (403A, 403(q)5).
If displaying the caloric information is going to detract and decrease in business profits in anyway, it will be deemed illegal and unconstitutional.
The business of America is business.
There's a lot of precedent for this. Look at the back of any packaged food and you'll the easy-to-read Nutrition Facts section. First amendment? In the grand scheme of government regulation of commerce, this is nothing.
As others have said, this 1st amendment claim is bullshit. My Harlem ihop has already had the calorie count for a few weeks. I'm trying to bulk up, so knowing my meal was 1500 calories was very helpful.
Joeb, the nutrition information is required on all packaged food. The restaurant bill here applies to chains with 15 stores or more nationwide. I don't know about a First Amendment case but it seems pretty ridiculous to exclude individual restaurants that may be serving pretty much the same food.
FYI, there 12 Nobu restaurants in the United States. I would give anything for them to expand a little more and then fall under this law.
I haven't read the law but I wonder how easy it would be for an operation like Nobu to make minor changes at each location so that it doesn't qualify as a "chain".
I haven't read the law but I wonder how easy it would be for an operation like Nobu to make minor changes at each location so that it doesn't qualify as a "chain".
If you've ever been a Nobu or just walked by one they are all pretty much the same: menu, decor, name. They have one blanket website so it would be hard to say they aren't the same business.
Well if they can BS their ownership structure so could McDonald's. The franchisees should just break up their ownership so that each corporate entity only owned 14 or fewer stores. Or they could just make the law apply to every restaurant which would actually fair. This is like that ridiculous health care law in Maryland that somehow miraculously only applied to Wal-mart.
I have to agree with EastRiver.
This should apply to all restaurants. The notion that this is more of burden to small restaurants is bull. I can tell you the caloric content of the sandwich I just made myself for lunch with about one minute of research on the internet.
When people continue to eat at these restaurants (and they will, because they do now when they already know it's bad for them), what's next? A signed affidavit stating that you realize the food you are about to be served is bad for you?