gan requiring trans fat information on package nutrition labels, which allowed consumers to make informed purchases of products with the additive.
34 Multiple restaurant chains also pledged to stop using trans fats.
New York City, Cleveland, Philadelphia, and California banned trans fats
from restaurant menus altogether.
36 Over time, data about negative health
effects, local and industry practices instituting bans, and consumer support
for removing trans fats bolstered FDA’s plans to ban it entirely.
2. Medical Marijuana
Unlike with trans fats, marijuana bans are going in the opposite direction
as states ease restrictions on its use. Historically, state and federal authori-
ties classified marijuana alongside other illegal drugs, such as heroin, be-
cause they considered it highly addictive and lacking legitimate medical
use. States initially regulated the drug by adopting the Uniform Narcotic
Drug Act in the 1930s.
38 After taking many steps to ban marijuana importa-
tion, exportation, and manufacturing, Congress banned these activities in
1970 by listing marijuana as a “Schedule I” substance in the Controlled
39 As social attitudes about marijuana for medicinal purpos-
es change, however, so are states’ policies. In 1996, California legalized
basics/fat/ transfat.html; Olga Khazan, When Trans Fats Were Healthy, ATLANTIC (Nov. 8,
2013, 9: 23 AM), http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/11/when-trans-fats-were-
34. Sabrina Tavernise, F. D. A. Ruling Would All but Eliminate Trans Fats, N.Y. TIMES,
Nov. 7, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/08/health/fda-trans-fats.html?_r=0.
35. Thomas M. Burton & Julie Jargon, FDA Says Trans Fats Aren’t Safe in Food,
WALL ST. J., Nov. 7, 2013, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB100014240527023033095
36. N.Y. C., N.Y., HEALTH CODE § 81.08 (2006); CLEVELAND, OHIO, CODIFIED
ORDINANCE 241.42 (2011); PHILA., PENN., CODE § 6-307 (2007); CAL. HEALTH & SAFETY
CODE § 114377 (West, WestlawNext, through Ch. 16 of 2014 Reg.Sess. and all propositions
on the June 3, 2014 ballot).
37. More people also bought menu items with zero percent trans fat after the restriction
went into place, representing an eighty-six percent increase in these healthier options over a
two-year period. Park, supra note 15.
38. Although Congress passed the Harrison Act in 1914, it did not apply to the sale, distribution, or possession of preparations containing minimal amounts of narcotic drugs, i.e.
less than two grains of opium, one eighth of a grain of heroin. Ch. 1, § 6, 38 Stat. 785
(1914); see also Harry Anslinger, The Reason for the Uniform State Narcotic Legislation, 21
GEO. L.J. 52, 52-62 (1932) (discussing state marijuana laws and need for national regulation). States adopted the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act over a period of years roughly between
1934-38. See Thomas Quinn & Gerald McLaughlin, Evolution of Federal Drug Control Legislation,
22 CATH. U. L. REV. 586, 602 (1972).
39. Quinn & McLaughlin, supra note 38, at 603-06. At the federal level, marijuana remains classified as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act. Schedule I
substances are considered to have a high potential for dependency and no accepted medical
use, making distribution of marijuana a federal offense. David Savage, Medical Marijuana
Advocates Seek Reclassification of Drug, L. A. TIMES, Oct. 16, 2012, http://articles.