More on the Altria v. Good Oral Argument

An interesting analysis here on Scotusblog.  The official transcript is available here.  Some highlights of the Scotusblog analysis, by Lyle Denniston:

• The government sided with the plaintiffs on the implied preemption quesiton, but only on that question.
• But the judges weren’t buying it – asking why the FTC hasn’t regulated these misleading ads since they know about them for some time.  Justice Scalia said: “When did the Commission know this stuff?  I had a case when I sat on the Court of Appeals, so it had to be before 1984…It’s been general knowledge for a long time, and the FTC has done nothing abput it.”
• The defendants oral argument focused on the express preemption issue only.  Denniston quotes the following exchange between the defendant’s lawyer, Theodore Olson, and Justice Scalia — Olson:  “I’d like to spend no time on the implied preemption argument.”  Justice Scalia: “Good idea.”

ADL