Featured News

results

EPA Denies Anti-Fluoride Petition

The EPA rejected a petition in August 2013 seeking to ban a form of fluoride that is commonly used to fluoridate drinking water, noting that petitioners lacked “sufficient facts” to support their case.

Tennessee Law Requires Public Notice

A Tennessee law enacted in 2012 requires local water systems to provide a minimum period of public notification before ceasing or starting fluoridation.

Wilson v. City of Council Bluffs

Case Name: 
Wilson v. City of Council Bluffs
Plaintiff: 
C.L. Wilson
Defendant: 
City of Council Bluffs
Other Parties: 
Resident taxpayers and users of the public water supply of City of Council Bluffs
Citation: 

253 Iowa 162; 110 N.W.2d 569 (Iowa 1961)

Year: 
1961
Court Name: 
Supreme Court of Iowa
Abstract: 

Plaintiffs brought an action against the City of Council Bluffs, Iowa, seeking to enjoin the City’s enforcement of an ordinance providing for fluoridation of the City’s municipal water supply. Plaintiffs argued that the City, as a municipal corporation, lacked statutory authority to enact the fluoridation ordinance. The court held that the City had implied authority to enact the ordinance pursuant to its statutory authority to preserve the health of its inhabitants.

State: 
Opinion Judges: 
Hays J

Teeter v. City of LaPorte

Case Name: 
Teeter v. City of LaPorte
Plaintiff: 
Teeter, et al.
Defendant: 
Municipal City of LaPorte, et al.
Citation: 

236 Ind. 146; 139 N.E.2d 158 (Ind. 1956)

Year: 
1956
Court Name: 
Supreme Court of Indiana
Abstract: 

Appeal by appellants/plaintiffs below from a judgment for appellees/defendants below for failure to properly state claims sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Plaintiffs sought to enjoin defendants from adding fluoride to water supplied by the municipal waterworks and to declare void an ordinance authorizing the addition of fluoride to the public water supply. Because the defendants did not file a motion to make the amended complaint more specific, the court considered the allegations in favor of the pleading. The court held that the complaint was not subject to a demurrer.

State: 
Opinion Judges: 
Emmert JA

Schuringa v. City of Chicago

Case Name: 
Schuringa v. City of Chicago
Plaintiff: 
Alice Schuringa
Defendant: 
City of Chicago
Citation: 

30 Ill. 2d 504; 198 N.E.2d 326 (Ill. 1964)

Year: 
1964
Court Name: 
Supreme Court of Illinois
Abstract: 

Plaintiffs brought action against the City of Chicago, seeking to enjoin it from fluoridating the city’s water supply. Plaintiffs allege that the City’s actions in fluoridating the water supply were an unreasonable, arbitrary and unwarranted exercise of the police power, and that it infringed upon fundamental liberties protected by constitutional guarantees of due process of law. The court rejected plaintiff’s claims and held that the fluoridation program was a reasonable and proper exercise of the city’s police powers.

Case Tags: 
State: 
Opinion Judges: 
Daily

Illinois Pure Water Committee, Inc. v. Yoder

Case Name: 
Illinois Pure Water Committee, Inc. v. Yoder
Plaintiff: 
Illinois Pure Water Committee, Inc.
Defendant: 
Dr. Franklin Yoder, Director of Department of Public Health
Citation: 

6 Ill. App.3d 659; 286 N.E.2d 155 (Ill. App. Ct. 1972)

Year: 
1972
Court Name: 
Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District
Abstract: 

Illinois Court of Appeals reversed trial court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim. Plaintiffs were the Illinois Pure Water Committee, Inc. (IPWC); an officer of IPWC; mayor and chief executive officer of the Village of Pesotum, Illinois; and a Christian Scientist and resident of Highland Park, Illinois. After alleging that fluorine was being injected into the water system pursuant to Illinois state law and describing the various dangers fluorine posed, the complaint alleged that (1) the statute was unconstitutional because it denied plaintiffs due process of law and placed their lives and health in jeopardy without due process of law by forcing the plaintiffs to consume the tainted water; (2) the statute was so vague and uncertain and lacked requisite safeguards as to render it unconstitutional; and (3) that the statute was an unconstitutional delegation of authority. Taking the facts as alleged in the complaint as true, the court of appeals determined that the plaintiffs (except the mayor) did allege sufficient facts to state a cause of action.

State: 
Opinion Judges: 
Moran GJ

Illinois Pure Water Committee, Inc. v. Director of Public Health

Case Name: 
Illinois Pure Water Committee, Inc. v. Director of Public Health
Plaintiff: 
Illinois Pure Water Committee, Inc.
Defendant: 
Director of Public Health
Citation: 

104 Ill.2d 243; 83 Ill. Dec. 568; 470 N.E.2d 988 (Ill. 1984)

Year: 
1984
Court Name: 
Supreme Court of Illinois
Abstract: 

Plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that an Illinois state statute providing for the fluoridation of public water supplies was an unreasonable exercise of the police power and was an unconstitutional violation of a fundamental right. Plaintiffs also sought an order enjoining the water company from introducing fluoride into the public water supply and enjoining the Illinois Department of Public Health and the Environmental Protection Agency from enforcing the statute. The court held that no fundamental right was involved and that the fluoridation statute was a reasonable exercise of the state’s police power.

State: 
Opinion Judges: 
Goldenhersh

Quiles v. City of Boynton Beach

Case Name: 
Quiles v. City of Boynton Beach
Plaintiff: 
Jesus F. Quiles
Defendant: 
City of Boynton Beach
Other Parties: 
Gerald Broening
Citation: 

802 So.2d 397 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Year: 
2001
Court Name: 
Court of Appeals of Florida, Fourth District
Abstract: 

Plaintiff filed action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the City of Boynton Beach, alleging the city’s fluoridation of its public water supply violated his right to refuse medical treatment under the Florida and United States constitutions. The court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal, finding that the city was acting within its legal and constitutional limitations, and that fluoridation of water does not constitute a medical procedure because plaintiff is not compelled to drink the fluoridated water.

State: 
Opinion Judges: 
Gross

City Commission of City of Fort Pierce v. State ex rel. Altenhoff

Case Name: 
City Commission of City of Fort Pierce v. State ex rel. Altenhoff
Plaintiff: 
City Commission of City of Fort Pierce
Defendant: 
State ex rel. Altenhoff
Citation: 

143 So.2d 879 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)

Year: 
1962
Court Name: 
District Court of Appeals of Florida, Second District
Abstract: 

On behalf of the state of Florida, relator sought to restrain the City Commission of the City of Fort Pierce from implementing a municipal ordinance directing the City Manager to fluoridate the city’s water supply. Plaintiff alleged that the city did not have the power to fluoridate the public water supply. The Florida District Court of Appeals rejected the state’s argument and held that the city did have the power to fluoridate the water under the broad powers granted to it in its charter.

State: 
Opinion Judges: 
Allen

Pages

Recent State and Local Action

results

Missouri :: Ordinance :: Sullivan

Abstract: 

Sullivan's City Council passed Ordiance 3667, eliminating the city's fluoridation requirement, repealing Sullivan Code 705.050. 

See also James B. Bartle, Fluoridation Repealed In Sullivan, Three Ordinances Approved, Sullivan Independent News (June 2, 2015), available at http://www.mysullivannews.com/2015/06/fluoridation-repealed-in-sullivan-....

 

Last updated: June 19, 2015.  

 

Citation: 
Title: 
Chapter: 
Article: 
Legislation Type: 
Locality: 
Part: 
Division: 
Ordinance: 
Subchapter: 
Rule: 
Section: 
State: 

Michigan :: Ordinance :: West Branch

Abstract: 

On June 1, 2015, West Branch City Counsel voted 6-1 to increase water fluoridation levels to the state and Federal recommended 0.7 ppm. See Matt Varcak, "City votes to increase level of fluoride in the water," Ogemaw County Herald (June 1, 2015), available at http://www.ogemawherald.com/stories/City-votes-to-increase-level-of-fluoride-in-water,101683.   

 

Last updated June 19, 2015.

Citation: 
Title: 
Chapter: 
Article: 
Legislation Type: 
Locality: 
Part: 
Division: 
Ordinance: 
Subchapter: 
Rule: 
Section: 
State: 

New York :: Administrative Code

Abstract: 

The additions to the New York Public Health Code prevent jurisdictions already participating in water fluoridation from ceasing their program without first providing a notice to the public and a ninety-day comment period.

Citation: 

NY PUB HEALTH § 1100–a

Date Adopted: 
Mon, 04/13/2015
Title: 
Chapter: 
Legislation Type: 
Statute
Article: 
Locality: 
Part: 
Division: 
Ordinance: 
Subchapter: 
Rule: 
Section: 
State: 

West Virginia :: Local Authority :: Clarksburg

Abstract: 

Clarksburg, WV has voted to take bids for all of its water treatment chemicals save for fluoride, essentially ending water fluoridation in the jurisdiction.  See http://wvmetronews.com/2015/05/11/clarksburg-water-board-votes-to-end-practice-of-fluoridation/.  The Water Board has decided to continue to discuss the issue even after not voting to fund any fluoride contracts. See http://www.theet.com/news/local/water-board-to-resume-discussions-about-fluoride/article_4000700a-30b8-5d34-a8db-bb29463c472c.html

Last Updated: May 19, 2015

Michigan :: Ogemaw County :: Consideration

Abstract: 

The West Branch (Michigan) city counsel will consider whether to add fluoride to its water supply in the near future.  See http://ogemawherald.com/stories/City-to-consider-adding-additional-fluor....

 

Last updated: April 10, 2015.  

Subscribe to Fluoride Legislative User Information Database (FLUID) RSS