Connection lost
Server error
FDA v. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court held that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lacked the authority to regulate tobacco products. The Court found that Congress had not granted the FDA this power, citing the overall statutory scheme and a history of specific, tobacco-related legislation.
Legal Significance: This case established the modern “major questions doctrine,” holding that an agency cannot claim authority over an issue of vast economic and political significance without a clear delegation of authority from Congress. It also affirmed that subsequent, specific statutes can effectively preclude agency action under a broad, general statute.
FDA v. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
After decades of explicitly disavowing jurisdiction, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1996 issued regulations to restrict the sale and marketing of tobacco products to minors. The FDA asserted authority under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), concluding that nicotine is a “drug” and cigarettes are “drug delivery devices” because they are intended to affect the structure and function of the body. The FDA reasoned that this intent could be inferred from the foreseeable effects of nicotine, consumer use patterns, and manufacturers’ internal documents. The regulations included age verification for sales, prohibitions on free samples, and significant advertising restrictions. A group of tobacco companies challenged the regulations, arguing the FDA lacked statutory authority. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, holding that Congress had precluded FDA jurisdiction over tobacco. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the question of the FDA’s authority.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did Congress grant the Food and Drug Administration the authority under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to regulate tobacco products as “drugs” and “devices”?
No. The Court held that Congress has not granted the FDA the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Did Congress grant the Food and Drug Administration the authority under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to regulate tobacco products as “drugs” and “devices”?
Conclusion
This landmark decision significantly curbed agency authority by establishing that an agency Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam
Legal Rule
In determining whether Congress has delegated authority to an administrative agency, a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident
Legal Analysis
The Court's analysis, grounded in statutory interpretation and administrative law principles, proceeded Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mo
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The Supreme Court held the FDA lacks authority to regulate tobacco
