As a companion must-read article to Tim’s column on the ObamaCare birth control mandate, John Cochrane…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Cato on Contraception Mandate: 'We Should All be Exempt'

As a companion must-read article to Tim’s column on the ObamaCare birth control mandate, John Cochrane of Cato explains why President Barack Obama’s proposed compromise to exempt church-related institutions misses the point:

Our nation is divided on social issues. The natural compromise is simple: Birth control, abortion and other contentious practices are permitted. But those who object don't have to pay for them. The federal takeover of medicine prevents us from reaching these natural compromises and needlessly divides our society.

The critics fell for a trap. By focusing on an exemption for church-related institutions, critics effectively admit that it is right for the rest of us to be subjected to this sort of mandate. They accept the horribly misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable…[more]

February 10, 2012 • 04:52 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Home Jester's Courtroom A Class Action Lawsuit Sours
A Class Action Lawsuit Sours Print
Thursday, January 24 2008

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the dismissal of a class action lawsuit which sought, among other things, to require sellers of milk to put labels on their containers warning consumers that some may experience adverse symptoms if they drink milk and are lactose intolerant.

According to court documents, the class of plaintiffs, defined as consisting of individuals who consumed milk before becoming aware that they were lactose intolerant, suggested two specific warnings. The first stated, "Warning - If you experience diarrhea or stomach cramps after consuming milk, you may be lactose intolerant. Check with your physician." The second proposed, "Warning - Lactose intolerant individuals may experience bloating, diarrhea, or other gastrointestinal discomfort from consuming milk. Check with your physician."

In affirming the lower court's dismissal, the appellate court concurred that the manufacturers had no duty to warn because the health consequences of being lactose intolerant are well known. "We hold as a matter of law that a reasonable consumer today would be well aware that milk may adversely affect some people," the court concluded, adding that "the risk that milk will cause temporary gas and stomach discomfort to lactose-intolerant individuals who do not yet know of their condition cannot support a failure-to-warn tort claim under D.C. tort law."

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, author of the court's opinion, cautioned that "a bout of gas or indigestion does not justify a race to the courthouse. Indeed, were the rule otherwise, a variety of food manufacturers as well as stadiums, bars, restaurants, convenience stores, and hot dog stands throughout the country would be liable to millions of would-be plaintiffs every day. Plaintiffs' novel claim falls short of what D.C. law requires."

—Source: Law.com

Question of the Week   
Where does the United States rank in The Heritage Foundation’s 2012 Index of Economic Freedom?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Someone needs to ask Mr. Obama how an increasingly impoverished nation, limping along on food stamps and housing subsidies, is going to pay for the existing beneficiaries, along with 77 million Baby Boomers set to retire in the next 25 years. A president who has impaired the vibrancy of the private sector so badly has long since forfeited the moral high ground."…[more]
 
 
—Mona Charen, Nationally Syndicated Columnist
— Mona Charen, Nationally Syndicated Columnist
 
Liberty Poll   

Should the Obama administration support Israel in a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities?