Chez Chesler

Thanks to BostonHerald.com - Opinion & Editorial: Burned out by butt-inskis (also reproduced here) for the pointer. A stated intent of the ordinance is to "reduc[e] the potential for children to associate smoking and tobacco with a healthy lifestyle". Doesn't that make smoking not just an action, but expressive behavior, which is therefore protected by the First Amendment? Suppose someone wants to send the message that smoking is associated with a healthy lifestyle? The Calabasas City Council has already determined that this message is expressed by smoking.