On January 31, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit enjoined enforcement of a San Francisco ordinance that required advertisements for sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) to include prominent health warnings linking SSB consumption to obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay. The 11-judge en banc court held that requiring advertisers to include the controversial warning violated First Amendment protections against government-compelled speech. The decision was a victory for WLF, which filed a brief urging the court to strike down the ordinance. The court agreed with WLF that although governments may require companies to include noncontroversial statements in their advertising and labeling, the San Francisco ordinance was “unduly burdensome” because it required the health warning to occupy at least 20% of the area of the advertisement—and thereby discouraged companies from advertising at all.  The court did not address whether the warning qualified as “noncontroversial.”