Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password
Reason logo

Reason's Annual Webathon is underway! Donate today to see your name here.

Reason is supported by:
B. Daniel Blatt

Donate

If the Fat Suit Fits

Tim Cavanaugh | 3.12.2004 1:57 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

New at Reason: Is the pleasure of seeing attorney John Banzhaf hoist on his carb-loaded, polyunsaturated petard worth the price of another federal pre-emption of state and individual rights? Jacob Sullum weighs the arguments over fat lawsuits.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Test This, Turing

Tim Cavanaugh
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (11)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Russ   22 years ago

    Here's a better idea.

    Similar to the amusement park roller-coaster screening device that declares that patrons "MUST BE --> THIS TALL TO RIDE", fast food restaurants can just put a weigh scale in front of the cash register and decline to serve obese people... for their own safety, of course.

    I'd like to see the resulting howls of indignation.

  2. Simply Put   22 years ago

    How about a "Personal Responsibility in America Act" and leave it at that?

  3. dwb   22 years ago

    The clerks can just point to the sign that says:

    Federal Law prohibits this establishment from serving VOPs--Visibly Obese People.
    If you look like you are over 185 pounds of weight, we have to card you. Hey, its the law! 🙂

  4. dwb   22 years ago

    The clerks can just point to the sign that says:

    Federal Law prohibits this establishment from serving VOPs--Visibly Obese People.
    If you look like you are over 185 pounds of weight, we have to card you. Hey, it's the law! 🙂

  5. db   22 years ago

    Sorry for the double post--I was simply appalled that I had misspelled "it's." Rather quaint in this day and age, eh?

  6. Shannon Love   22 years ago

    Jacob Sullum correctly points out that Federalism is a two way street. If state courts view themselves as vehicles for national legislation via lawsuits, then the Federal government can legitimate step in to restore the traditional balance.

    Seems to be a lot of this going on, novel legal theory or action that requires new legislation to restore the previous status quo. Be nice to return to the days when the courts where the most conservative branch of the government.

  7. alkali   22 years ago

    And herein lies the strongest rationale for congressional intervention, even if it means telling state courts which lawsuits they may hear?a prospect that should make federalists uncomfortable. The agreement that settled the state tobacco lawsuits in effect imposed a nationwide tax and nationwide regulations, including advertising restrictions that would have been unconstitutional if imposed by statute, without approval from Congress or any state legislature. A similar arrangement with food companies (or gun manufacturers, the concern of the other NRA) likewise would usurp the authority of state and federal legislators.

    That's the best libertarian defense of the Supreme Court's Commerce Clause jurisprudence I've heard to date.

  8. old-fashioned   22 years ago

    Simply Put says:
    "How about a "Personal Responsibility in America Act" and leave it at that?"

    Sorry, but it's too late. That philosophy is all but dead in this country. What passed as satire only a few years ago is now established fact. Where I live it is now illegal to smoke, outdoors, in a park. Evidently the squirrels cannot handle the massive plums of second-hand smoke inundating their treetop dwellings.

  9. dj of raleigh   22 years ago

    > exit poll in 2000 asked Nader voters what they would have done had Nader not been on the ballot. Thirty percent of his supporters said they would not have voted at all. The rest said they would have voted for Gore over George W. Bush, by a ratio of better than 2-to-1 (48 percent to 22 percent).

  10. Andrew Lynch   22 years ago

    Get this. The Bush administration stuck its big fat nose into this mess. The FDA's Obesity Working Group (is everyone in the group trim and fit?) has announced that it plans to take action on behalf of American fatties.

    You can review the list here.

    My two favorite items from the article.

    1) An item on the Fat Group's list is "Encouraging restaurants to include and emphasize nutritional information." What if they don't want to? Come on, let's see the fine print.

    2) Tom Harkin: "More aggressive steps to curb obesity and give consumers the tools to make healthy decisions are necessary to address this growing crisis." (emphasis mine)

    "More aggressive steps" coming out of a big-government warrior's mouth? How shocking. But better is that Harkin is too stupid to realize his own pun. Growing crisis, indeed.

  11. Larry   22 years ago

    {Before Congress passes legislation like this, Banzhaf said, "there should be a real history which must be corrected, not orchestrated panic based upon one failed lawsuit and some quoted-out-of-context rhetoric."}

    IOW if one person gets fat then lawsuits should shut down the entire fast food industry; but for anti-lawsuit legislation "there should be a real history of abuse."

    Do as I say, don't do as I do.

    Just think. I used to say, "Smoking lawsuits are going to lead to gun lawsuits are going to lead to fast food lawsuits are going to lead to..." and get called "paranoid."

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Webathon 2025: Dec. 2 - Dec. 9 Thanks to 606 donors, we've reached $456,136 of our $400,000 $600,000 goal!

Reason Webathon 2023

All Donations NOW Being Matched! Donate Now

Latest

French Study on mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Finds a Drop in Severe COVID—and No Increase in Deaths

Ronald Bailey | 12.5.2025 4:25 PM

Warner Bros. Accepts Netflix's $83 Billion Bid, but Antitrust Threats Still Loom

Jack Nicastro | 12.5.2025 3:36 PM

Reason Webathon Woodchips Through $400,000 Goal Before the Halfway Point!

Matt Welch | 12.5.2025 2:20 PM

The 'Threat' That Supposedly Justified Killing 2 Boat Attack Survivors Was Entirely Speculative

Jacob Sullum | 12.5.2025 1:45 PM

What America Can Learn From Japanese Housing

Andrew Heaton | 12.5.2025 11:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

HELP EXPAND REASON’S JOURNALISM

Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.

Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREEDOM

Your donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks