The government and the nation's biggest cigarette maker separately asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a racketeering verdict.

Altria Group, the owner of Philip Morris USA, and two co-defendants, Lorillard and Reynolds American, filed to overturn a racketeering verdict that was upheld by an appeals court last year, arguing that the racketeering law was improperly invoked, while the government argues the appeals court wrongly denied the disgorgement of billions of dollars in ill-gotten gains by the tobacco industry.
The administration, joined by public health groups, wants the court to throw out rulings that bar the government from collecting USD 280 billion of past tobacco profits or USD 14 billion for a national campaign to curb smoking. If the Supreme Court agrees to review the case, which may take months, it could redefine the reach of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO law, which has so far often been employed against the Mafia and other criminal organizations. Cigarette makers may be obliged to spend millions or billions of dollars for anti-tobacco advertising.
In May, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed a trial judge's verdict against the cigarette makers, finding they violated federal anti-racketeering laws by conspiring to lie about the dangers of smoking. The cigarette manufacturing companies argue the courts’ decision to brand their statements about smoking as fraudulent unfairly denied them their rights to exercies free speech, which included questioning some of the emerging science on tobacco and addiction.
In its petition to the Supreme Court, the government argued that the appeals court had “eviscerated the relief available” in the biggest civil racketeering case ever brought by the United States. The ruling thwarted the trial court's efforts to craft appropriate relief “to remedy the ongoing effects of fifty years of unlawful racketeering activity – unlawful acts that have harmed and continue to harm the lives and health of many millions of Americans,” the government stated.
The case was filed in 1999 by the Clinton administration, which sought USD 289 billion in damages. During the original trial, which began in 2004, the Justice Department under the Bush administration scaled back its demands to USD 14 billion for anti-smoking campaigns. In 2006, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler ultimately ruled that the companies broke the law and could no longer use expressions such as “low tar” or “light” in their cigarette marketing. But she said she did not have the authority to force them to fund a smoking cessation program. The appeals court ruled that Kessler was limited to "forward-looking" remedies aimed at future racketeering violations and was precluded from imposing smoking-cessation and public-education remedies.
The public health groups in the case are: American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, National African American Tobacco Prevention Network and Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund. (pi)