The following excerpt is from Nutritional Health Alliance v. Shalala, 144 F.3d 220 (2nd Cir. 1998):
We agree with the district court's earlier decision, in effect holding that the absence of a final deadline constituted a prior restraint of unlimited duration, and that without such a deadline, the preauthorization scheme would not pass constitutional muster. See NHA v. Shalala, 953 F.Supp. at 530. But we also find that a restraint of up to 540 days, in the context of evaluating, pursuant to defined standards, whether commercial health claims are truthful and non-misleading, is constitutionally valid. 17
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.