Judge tosses Safeway lawsuit over S.F. tobacco ban

Source: Associated Press

A federal judge has granted a motion by San Francisco officials to dismiss a lawsuit filed by grocery chain Safeway Inc. challenging a city ordinance banning tobacco sales in stores with pharmacies.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken dismissed the suit Friday filed by the Pleasanton company, which argued grocery stores have a constitutional right to sell cigarettes.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/15/BA3L1KB95V.DTL

So if a grocery store does not have a pharmacy, then they can sell cigarettes?

While I would love to see cigarette sales restricted & eventually ended, I find the distinction a bit odd.

can dictate if a legal product can or cannot be sold...

hmmmmmmm

The town I live in was a "dry" town both before and after prohibition. It isn't any more, but we, for some unknown reason, still prohibit bowling alleys.

But alcohol is a special case. Congress authorized its regulation by the states, Prohibition banned alcohol for a lot of uses. Then the 21st amendment repealed prohibition but stipulated, "The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited."

If the state delegates it to counties or bergs, they delegate it. Nonetheless, banning booze is Constitutional by definition.

"Bowling alley" is not found in the Constitution, but I suspect that if they really are prohibited it's a business permitting issue. The city, having decreed that everything not allowed is illegal, comes back and says what's allowed. If they couldn't do that, there are other ways to handling it: "All bowling alleys must include a 90 degree turn at a distance not less than 8 feet from the location that the pins are positioned."