San Francisco Revokes Cell Phone Radiation Law
A potentially landmark legislation that consumer and health advocates had been banking on was finally struck down by the San Francisco supervisors following a key loss in court against the cell phone industry. More on the story here…
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors ends its 3-year battle with the wireless industry by agreeing to a permanent injunction against the “Right to Know” ordinance.
As expected, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Tuesday approved a settlement with the wireless industry over a controversial law that would have required city retailers to inform customers about the possible dangers of cell phone radiation.
By a 10-to-1 vote, the Board agreed to a permanent injunction against the “Right to Know” ordinance and promised that it will refrain from further litigation. In return, the CTIA, the wireless industry’s trade association, will waive any claims to attorney’s fees. Supervisor John Avalos was the lone dissenting vote.
Ellie Marks, the director of the California Brain Tumor Association and a strong supporter of the original law, called the vote “a terrible blow” to public health for the whole country. “The dynamics have changed in the chambers of City Hall,” she wrote in an e-mailed statement to CNET. “Many other states and cities wanted to follow San Francisco’s lead.”
Indeed, yesterday’s vote was a quiet end to a piece of legislation that public health advocates like Marks hoped would repeat in city halls and statehouses across the country. Originally passed in June 2010, the “Right to Know Ordinance” was the first of its kind in the country.
Yet, the ordinance quickly caught the ire of the CTIA, which argued that the law was unconstitutional, misleading to consumers, and that it infringed on the First Amendment rights of retailers. Though the Board watered the down the legislation a year later and delayed its implementation several times, a federal appeals court blocked implementation of the ordinance last September after the CTIA continued to press its case.
See full story on cnet.com (Image courtesy of cnet.com)
Other states and cities who had been considering similar measures would most likely back down following this development. This is a win for the cell phone industry, and somewhat of a setback for supporters and advocates of the bill and the campaign for greater consumer awareness of the mobile phone radiation health issue.
Here’s one reaction to the CTIA win…
HELSINKI, Finland, May 8, 2013 — It is a well-known truth that money talks. The newest example of this “talk” comes from San Francisco, Calif. It is not only an example of ‘money talks’ phenomenon, but it is also an example of how weak the justice system is. Having substantial amounts of money helps winning in court and serves as a deterrent for anyone wishing to challenge the existing, pro-industry, status quo.
What is happening in San Francisco? As stated in the SFGate website:”…In 2010, the Board of Supervisors passed then-Mayor Gavin Newsom’s legislation that tried to force phone vendors to post in their stores the level of radiation emitted by their devices. But the cell phone industry fought back hard, and a federal appeals court decided last year that first-of-its-kind legislation violated first amendment rights….”
What is this information that “violates first amendment rights”?
It is the fact sheet #193 of the World Health Organization, which states that the cell phone radiation was in 2011 classified as a possible human carcinogen. Thirty international experts nearly unanimously (28 out of 30 votes) agreed on it. The full documentation of this decision, IARC Monograph 102, was just published on-line and is freely available for download.
See full story on washingtontimes.com (Photo courtesy of washingtontimes.com)
–
