The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Food and Drugs Act in the case that is technically known as the United States vs. 0. A. Johnson, has already been commented on in The Journal.1 This week we reproduce in "The Propaganda for Reform" the full text of both the majority and the dissenting opinions of the court. A careful reading of these two documents will prove both interesting and instructive. Without desiring to criticize the findings of the highest court in the land, we believe that a careful study of the majority opinion will lead to the inevitable conclusion that the court had to strain the meaning of the English language and flounder far afield in order to find points on which to reach a decision that would uphold the lower court. On the other hand, we believe that all open-minded persons will declare that Justice Hughes' dissenting opinion is
THE SUPREME COURT ON THE FOOD AND DRUGS ACT. JAMA. 1911;LVI(24):1819–1820. doi:10.1001/jama.1911.02560240049025
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: