CTIA Sues San Francisco Over New Cell Phone Radiation Notification Ordinance

In a move that might institute a prolonged court battle, CTIA is suing San Francisco over its latest law regarding cell phone radiation. According to its argument, CTIA stated that the new law infringes on the Supremacy Clause as espoused in the US Constitution and thus must be stopped.

Halting enforcement

The CTIA said the filling of a lawsuit is one measure of halting its enforcement. The controversial law was passed in the city back in June after revelations from an international medical journal, called Interphone that detailed the effects of radiation from phones and their connection to brain cancer. The law requires that all wireless gadgets retailers indicate the levels of radiation of their phones. After the study, Interphone, was released, the law was quickly passed and approved by San Francisco Board of Supervisors and its Mayor and CTIA is up in arms against it. CTIA’s basing its argument on disparities between the new law and what the Federal law espouses, a factor that has previously been used to argue against state laws or municipal statutes that contravene it.

FCC Standards

However, it is perhaps important to look at this from a number of perspectives. First of all, the FCC is mandated with deciding the acceptable radiation levels for cell phones in America and demands that cell phone manufacturers carry out independent radiation tests that the FCC subsequently puts on its site for consumers to check. With the San Francisco new law, CTIA is arguing that the state is misinforming consumers by having them believe that the standards set by the FCC are not enough.  As such, the state’s ordinance, according to CTIA is falsely saying that some phones may be safer to use than others with regard to the amount of radio frequency emissions they make. Rather than just demanding that retailers of wireless devices show the radiation levels on their gadgets, the new law as well requires that retailers in the state have to show the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for their phones.

Creating Wrong Impressions of FCC

That means the retailing is obligated by law to let you know just at what rate your tissue is absorbing energy from the cell phone.However, according to CTIA, asking cell phone retailers to display SAR phone values even as they sell them might give a consumer the impression that the FCC set standards are lower even though such devices may have been approved by the FCC as compliant with their set radiation standards. What this suggests, according to CTIA is that there is a big disparity between what the FCC espouses as safe radiation levels and what San Francisco is trying to have with the new ordinance. As such, one thing stands out clearly as regards this case; it is based on the Supremacy Clause.

The Supremacy Clause as contained in the American constitution requires that all Federal laws supersede state laws or county statute and as such should not be contravened or infringed upon. The CTIA is challenging the new law in San Francisco upon this basis of contradiction.

One Comment

  1. jail bush

    CTIA Bluff. They have no case. This has nothing to do with the FCC. They’re just trying to scare cities out of doing this by making it difficult.
    More information about the biological effects of non-ionizing radiation from wireless technology is coming out every day. Enough is not being done by cities, counties, states and the Federal Government to protect us from the potentially devastating health and environmental effects. Through the 1996 telecommunications act the telecoms are shielded from liability and oversight. Initially cell phones were released with no pre-market safety testing despite the fact the Government and the Military have known for over 50 years that radio frequency is harmful to all biological systems (inthesenewtimes dot com/2009/05/02/6458/.). Health studies were suppressed and the 4 trillion dollar a year industry was given what amounts to a license to kill.
    On it’s face, the 1996 telecommunications act is unconstitutional and a cover-up. Within the fine print city governments are not allowed to consider “environmental” effects from cell towers. They should anyway! It is the moral and legal obligation of our government to protect our health and welfare? Or is it? When did this become an obsolete concept? A cell tower is a microwave weapon capable of causing cancer, genetic damage & other biological problems. Bees, bats, humans, plants and trees are all affected by RF & EMF. Communities fight to keep cell towers away from schools yet they allow the school boards to install wi fi in all of our schools thereby irradiating our kids for 6-7 hours each day. Kids go home and the genetic assault continues with DECT portable phones, cell phones, wi fi and Wii’s. A tsunami of cancers and early alzheimer’s await our kids. Young people under the age of 20 are 420% more at risk of forming brain tumors (Swedish study, Dr. Lennart Hardell) because of their soft skulls, brain size and cell turn over time. Instead of teaching “safer” cell phone use and the dangers of wireless technology our schools mindlessly rush to wireless bending to industry pressure rather than informed decision making. We teach about alcohol, tobacco, drugs and safe sex but not about “safer” cell phone use. We are in a wireless trance, scientists are panicking while young brains, ovaries and sperm burns.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *