NLEA LABELING RULES NECESSARY TO ADVANCE "SUBSTANTIAL GOVERNMENT INTEREST"
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
NLEA LABELING RULES NECESSARY TO ADVANCE "SUBSTANTIAL GOVERNMENT INTEREST," FDA maintained in an Aug. 11 brief filed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The brief was filed in response to a recent suit challenging the constitutionality of FDA's Jan. 4 final rules on dietary supplement health claims developed under the Nutrition Labeling & Education Act. Defending its rules, the agency's brief states that "because such restrictions are no greater than necessary to further a substantial government interest, they are permissible under the First Amendment."
You may also be interested in...
Perrigo promotes in pricing, planning
Combe sells most of its OTC brands
Finalization of a settlement between the Federal Trade Commission and Rexall Sundown regarding unsupported cellulite treatment claims for the firm's Cellasene dietary supplement hinges upon approval of two related class action settlements pending in California and Florida, according to FTC