Smoking Bans: This is a paper for political science regarding smoking bans in restaurants.

Essay by swavsfanUniversity, Bachelor'sA+, November 2006

download word file, 8 pages 3.0

For a law to be challenged as unconstitutional it must go through the state courts, then the federal courts, and finally it comes to the Supreme Court. Many state courts are currently upholding new legislation that creates a smoking ban in public places. However, the ability for a state court to uphold the laws created in its own state and what it would mean for the Supreme Court to say that same law is constitutional are two totally different things. It is that division between the state courts and the Supreme Court that shows federalism in America. One group must look at the entire nation and the other, just their own constituents. How would the federal Supreme Court' decision differ from the state Supreme Court rulings in states such as Wisconsin, California and New York, that allowed legislation of smoking bans in restaurants and bars? The differing opinions between the courts, the comparisons of privacy on a national stage and state stage, and who is affected by each opinion are the major factors that would affect the Supreme Courts opinion as compared to each state Supreme Court.

When the constitution of the United States was written there was no mention of privacy, but since the Supreme Court has ruled on certain issues and vaguely defined what privacy is, challenges of what it covers are coming to courts constantly. As it relates to smoking bans in public places such as restaurants and bars, state courts have said that laws banning smoking in those places are constitutional and will be enforced. The issue has yet to come to the Supreme Court, however, when the court finally does look at this they will be not only looking at one state's law, but rather whether or not the states can take away the...