Sarah Crymes, a 49-year-old Brooklyn resident, has been trying to get her 18-year-old son Josh to quit smoking for years. He’s been a heavy smoker since he was 13, Marlboros being his preferred brand.

“My son has been smoking for five years already. Non-stop. I’ve been trying to help him quit but nothing has worked,” said Crymes.

New York City was headed for a plan aimed to decrease the number of smokers, which would have forced retailers to display posters with graphic health risk warnings near their cigarette displays. Last month, however, a federal court rejected New York City's requirement. Retail stores appear to be satisfied with the rejection; however, many others, including health advocates, say the ruling is a missed opportunity for helping people quit smoking for good.

“Maybe [these warnings] could have discouraged my son from smoking once and for all,” said Crymes, with a sigh.

Another mother of a smoker, Irena Golano of Brooklyn, says she would have liked for the plan to pass, since it might help her son, 20-year-old smoker Alfred, quit, or at least reduce the amount of cigarettes he goes through in a day.

“I definitely think it would be a smart move,” said Golano. “Anything that could be done to help decrease smoking, should be done.”

Several health advocates are also dissatisfied with the ruling. David Lehmann, manager of Bronx Smoke-Free Partnership, was very disappointed with the judge’s decision.

“I really believe there would have been less smokers. It was supposed to encourage smokers to stop,” said Lehmann.

Sheelah Feinberg, director of The NYC Coalition for a Smoke-Free City, said tobacco is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. She believes placing warnings in stores will save lives and hopes the rulings will be reversed.

The New York City Health Department said the ruling was likely to decrease the number of smokers who quit, according to a statement. The city's warning signs would have depicted the grisly toll of smoking as well as provided helpful information about how to quit at a place where smokers were most likely to see it, the Health Department said.

The city’s plan was rejected after retailers and tobacco manufacturers sued, and a court ruled that it violates the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, which prevents state and local regulation of the advertising and the promotion of cigarettes.

Retail stores appear to be satisfied with this decision. Carlos Mullin, owner of local grocery shop on Kings Highway, thought the plan would have decreased his business.

“I feel like if I had a family member who was smoking, I would have wanted these posters up. But getting down to business, cigarettes are a major part of the purchases made,” said Mullin. “If there were to be fewer smokers, I might not end up making my money.”

Sierra Diaz, a 30-year-old cashier at a neighboring convenience store, agreed. She said that she has to earn her money some way. However, she did admit that she believes there would have been fewer smokers if this law has been enforced.

The ruling rejects New York City’s proposal, but other efforts to educate the public about the dangers of smoking are unaffected by the case. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has another plan, to be launched in September 2012, that would require tobacco retailers to display signs depicting diseased lungs and decaying teeth-- the gruesome health risks of smoking--on cigarette packages directly.

“The packaging is very important. Whatever is on the product tells the smokers the truth. FDA has been given right by congress for the graphics to be posted on the packaging and we are very hopeful,” concluded Lehmann.