Changing the constitutional landscape for firearms: the US Supreme Court's recent Second Amendment decisions.

In 2 recent cases-with important implications for public health practitioners, courts, and researchers-the US Supreme Court changed the landscape for judging the constitutionality of firearm laws under the Constitution's Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v Heller (2008), the court determined for the first time that the Second Amendment grants individuals a personal right to possess handguns in their home. In McDonald v City of Chicago (2010), the court concluded that this right affects the powers of state and local governments. The court identified broad categories of gun laws-other than handgun bans-that remain presumptively valid but did not provide a standard to judge their constitutionality. We discuss ways that researchers can assist decision makers.

The food industry and self-regulation: standards to promote success and to avoid public health failures.

Threatened by possible government regulation and critical public opinion, industries often undertake self-regulatory actions, issue statements of concern for public welfare, and assert that self-regulation is sufficient to protect the public. The food industry has made highly visible pledges to curtail children's food marketing, sell fewer unhealthy products in schools, and label foods in responsible ways. Ceding regulation to industry carries opportunities but is highly risky. In some industries (e.g., tobacco), self-regulation has been an abject failure, but in others (e.g., forestry and marine fisheries), it has been more successful. We examined food industry self-regulation in the context of other self-regulatory successes and failures and defined 8 standards that should be met if self-regulation is to be effective.

Innovative legal approaches to address obesity.

CONTEXT: The law is a powerful public health tool with considerable potential to address the obesity issue. Scientific advances, gaps in the current regulatory environment, and new ways of conceptualizing rights and responsibilities offer a foundation for legal innovation. METHODS: This article connects developments in public health and nutrition with legal advances to define promising avenues for preventing obesity through the application of the law. FINDINGS: Two sets of approaches are defined: (1) direct application of the law to factors known to contribute to obesity and (2) original and innovative legal solutions that address the weak regulatory stance of government and the ineffectiveness of existing policies used to control obesity. Specific legal strategies are discussed for limiting children's food marketing, confronting the potential addictive properties of food, compelling industry speech, increasing government speech, regulating conduct, using tort litigation, applying nuisance law as a litigation strategy, and considering performance-based regulation as an alternative to typical regulatory actions. Finally, preemption is an overriding issue and can play both a facilitative and a hindering role in obesity policy. CONCLUSIONS: Legal solutions are immediately available to the government to address obesity and should be considered at the federal, state, and local levels. New and innovative legal solutions represent opportunities to take the law in creative directions and to link legal, nutrition, and public health communities in constructive ways.

Preemption and the obesity epidemic: state and local menu labeling laws and the nutrition labeling and education act.

Obesity is widely recognized as a preventable cause of death and disease. Reducing obesity among adults and children has become a national health goal in the United States. As one approach to the obesity epidemic, public health practitioners and others have asserted the need to provide consumers with information about the foods they eat. Some state and local governments across the United States have introduced menu labeling bills and regulations that require restaurants to post information, such as calorie content, for foods offered on their menus or menu boards. A major dilemma is whether state and local menu labeling laws are preempted by the federal Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA). While few courts have addressed this issue, ongoing litigation in New York City provides an early glimpse of judicial interpretation in this area. This article explores these preemption issues, arguing that appropriately written and implemented menu labeling laws should not be preempted by the NLEA. We offer guidance for states and localities that wish to develop and implement menu labeling laws.

Limited liability and the public's health.

Corporations, through their products and behaviors, exert a strong effect on the well-being of populations. Industries including firearms, motor vehicles, tobacco, and alcohol produce and market products negatively impact public health. All of these industries are composed of corporations, which are legal fictions designed to provide limited exposure to liability, through a variety of mechanisms, for their investors and directors. This means that when actions are taken on behalf of a corporate entity, the individuals responsible generally will not face personal liability for the negative results of those actions. To illustrate this point, this article considers corporate products or practices that have caused harm in varied settings, and analyzes the role that limited liability played in these cases. In addition, the article identifies ways to modify or eliminate some of the principles and practices that accompany limited liability.

Understanding and informing policy implementation: a case study of the domestic violence provisions of the Maryland Gun Violence Act.

The Maryland Gun Violence Act, enacted into law in 1996, explicitly authorized courts to order batterers to surrender their firearms through civil protective orders. It also vested law enforcement with the explicit authority to remove guns when responding to a domestic violence complaint. In order to assess how these laws were implemented, we designed a case study and collected data from in-depth, key informant interviews, court observations, and relevant documents. We present findings from this study and recommend how to increase the likelihood that policies designed to separate batterers and guns are implemented in a way that will result in greater protections for victims of domestic violence.

Litigating for Native American health: the liability of alcoholic beverage makers and distributors.

Native American populations have long experienced excess morbidity and mortality attributable to alcohol. Historically, alcohol was introduced to the Native American population by European settlers, and was used to help those settlers get land and goods from the Indian population. In modern times, alcohol beverage makers and distributors continue to supply and market their products to Native American populations in amounts and manners that contribute to continuing health and safety problems. When some other products have been over-supplied or over-promoted to the detriment of the public's health, litigation has been brought against the makers or dealers of those products, sometimes using the legal theory of public nuisance. This article explores the potential for litigation brought by Native Americans against alcoholic beverage makers and distributors.

Reducing firearm violence: a research agenda.

In the United States, firearms are involved in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries each year. The magnitude of this problem prompted the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to issue a report in 2004 detailing the strengths and limitations of existing research on the relationship between firearms and violence. In response, a multidisciplinary group of experts in the field of firearms and violence formed the National Research Collaborative on Firearm Violence. The Collaborative met for 2 days in June 2005 to (1) critically review the main findings of the NAS report and (2) define a research agenda that could fill research and data gaps and inform policy that reduces gun-related crime, deaths and injuries. This article summarizes the Collaborative's conclusions and identifies priorities for research and funding.

The Baltimore Youth Ammunition Initiative: a model application of local public health authority in preventing gun violence.

In 2002, the Baltimore City Health Department, in collaboration with the Baltimore Police Department and the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, launched the Youth Ammunition Initiative. The initiative addressed Baltimore's problem of youth gun violence by targeting illegal firearm ammunition sales to the city's young people. The initiative included undercover "sting" investigations of local businesses and issuance of health department violation and abatement notices. Intermediate results included the passage of 2 Baltimore city council ordinances regulating ammunition sales and reducing the number of outlets eligible to sell ammunition. Although it is too early to assess effects on violent crime, the intervention could theoretically reduce youth violence by interrupting one source of ammunition to youths. More important, the initiative can serve as a policy model for health commissioners seeking to become more active in gun violence prevention efforts.