| 英文摘要 |
Tobacco use is one of the most serious threats to human public health. To combat this threat, many regulatory measures have been initiated and implemented. Among them, providing health warnings on packaging or other places is an important legal strategy. However, numerous lawsuits in the United States have demonstrated that efforts to combat tobacco use by compulsory disclosure must face challenges to free speech claims. In Taiwan, there are also constitutional disputes related to tobacco product labeling and sponsorship, in which freedom of speech is a core focus. In light of the fact that Taiwan’s constitutional practices in the field of freedom of speech have largely inherited the framework of the United States, the related constitutional principles and their application in the United States to tobacco health warnings are material worthy of exploration and reference. The purpose of this article is to observe and analyze the development of tobacco graphic warning litigation and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) litigation in the United States, as well as the issues and court opinions regarding freedom of speech, in order to reflect on the judicial review practices regarding the constitutionality of disclosure regulation. This article argues that the Zauderer test applicable to disclosure requirements in the United States is worthy of adoption, and the related litigations have vividly revealed its actual application, providing a concrete demonstration for us to utilize this standard. |