Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
After five-year legal battle, Berkeley must end extra radiation warning requirement
After five-year legal battle, Berkeley must end extra radiation warning requirement
In Featured News by Wireless Estimator September 21, 2020
A federal judge ruled last week that Berkeley, California cannot require cell phone retailers to warn customers about the possible radiation dangers from holding phones close to their bodies, a conclusion that was largely based upon the FCC’s assessment that the warnings are unneeded and would be injurious to business.
U.S. District Judge Edward Chen wrote in an 18-page order “the FCC could properly conclude that the Berkeley ordinance — as worded — overwarns and stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment of balancing federal objectives by the FCC.”
Berkeley’s 2015 ordinance provided cell phone exposure guidance, however, CTIA disagreed with it and filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of California and received a ruling in their favor, the court finding that the ordinance language was problematic.
CTIA also argued that the ordinance violated First Amendment rights .
{snip}
In Featured News by Wireless Estimator September 21, 2020
A federal judge ruled last week that Berkeley, California cannot require cell phone retailers to warn customers about the possible radiation dangers from holding phones close to their bodies, a conclusion that was largely based upon the FCC’s assessment that the warnings are unneeded and would be injurious to business.
U.S. District Judge Edward Chen wrote in an 18-page order “the FCC could properly conclude that the Berkeley ordinance — as worded — overwarns and stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment of balancing federal objectives by the FCC.”
Berkeley’s 2015 ordinance provided cell phone exposure guidance, however, CTIA disagreed with it and filed a lawsuit in the Northern District of California and received a ruling in their favor, the court finding that the ordinance language was problematic.
CTIA also argued that the ordinance violated First Amendment rights .
{snip}
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
