The Supreme Court has upheld the Food and Drugs Authority’s (FDA) ban on celebrities endorsing alcoholic beverages, dismissing a lawsuit filed by Mark Darlington.
The FDA’s guidelines, published in 2016, prohibit the use of well-known personalities in alcoholic beverage advertising to prevent minors from being influenced into alcohol consumption.
Darlington argued that the ban was discriminatory and violated the right to equality before the law, as enshrined in the 1992 Constitution.
He sought declarations that the guideline was discriminatory and unconstitutional, and an order striking it down.
Additionally, he sought an injunction to prevent the FDA from enforcing the guideline.
However, the Supreme Court ruled that the FDA’s directive was reasonable and did not contravene the Constitution.
The court’s majority decision (5-2) dismissed the suit, and the full judgment will be available on Friday, June 21.
The court’s decision affirms the FDA’s stance, prioritizing the protection of children and young people from alcoholism.
The ruling aligns with the World Health Organization’s policy and reinforces the FDA’s efforts to regulate alcohol advertising.
The FDA’s guideline aims to prevent the influence of celebrities on minors, who may be tempted to try alcoholic beverages due to their admiration for these personalities.
By upholding the ban, the Supreme Court has supported the FDA’s mission to safeguard the well-being of young people and prevent alcoholism.
The decision sets a precedent for future cases related to advertising regulations and the protection of vulnerable groups.
