The Supreme Court’s Decision in POM v. Coke: Two Supreme
Court Litigators Discuss Implications for the Future.
From the date of its filing, the POM v. Coke case has
caught the eye of food law watchers and the media alike. Centered on a dispute
about a juice drink label, the case raised new questions about the role of the Food
and Drug Administration's labeling requirements in preventing misleading consumer
information, and the interplay between federal regulation and private
This event brings two of the nation’s most experienced
Supreme Court litigators to UCLA to discuss the implications of the Supreme
Court’s ruling, which is considered to be one of the most significant in food
law in recent years.
- Seana Shiffrin | Professor
of Philosophy, UCLA; Pete Kameron Professor of Law and Social Justice;
Faculty Director, Law and Philosophy Program, UCLA School of Law
- Thomas Goldstein |
Partner, Goldstein & Russell P.C.
- Andrew Pincus | Partner, Mayer
Tom Goldstein is one of the nation’s most experienced
Supreme Court practitioners, having served as counsel to the petitioner or
respondent in roughly 10% of all of the Court’s merits cases for the past 15
years (approximately 100 in total), personally arguing 31. He is also the
co-founder and publisher of SCOTUSblog – a web-site devoted to comprehensive
coverage of the Court –the only weblog ever to receive the Peabody Award.
Andrew Pincus has argued 23 cases in the Supreme Court,
including AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011). A
former Assistant to the Solicitor General in the United States Department of
Justice and General Counsel of the United States Department of Commerce, Andy also
co-founded and serves as co-director of the Yale Law School's Supreme Court
Lunch will be provided to those who RSVP to ResnickProgram@law.ucla.edu by Wednesday, October 1st, 5pm.