Given the task definition and input, reply with output. In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.

“I’ve got to defend my children, and yours, and do what’s right to save lives,” the mayor said. “Obesity kills. There’s no question it kills.” 
  
 He added, “We believe that the judge’s decision was clearly in error, and we believe we will win on appeal.” 
  
 The plan, unveiled last May, was hailed by many public health officials as a breakthrough in the effort to combat the effects of high-calorie, sugary drinks on the public’s health. Similar proposals have been put forward in Los Angeles and Cambridge, Mass., even as the idea of a “war on soda” has become regular fare for late-night comedians. 
  
 Photo 
  
 Coffee shops and restaurants around the city had already begun editing menus, retraining employees and warning customers of the coming changes in the sorts of drinks they could and could not buy. Dunkin’ Donuts, for instance, told its employees they could no longer add sugar to large coffees. 
  
 The measure was already broadly unpopular: In a New York Times poll conducted last August, 60 percent of city residents said it was a bad idea for the Bloomberg administration to pass the limits, although Bronx and Queens residents were more likely than Manhattan residents to oppose it. 
  
 In his ruling, Justice Tingling concurred with much of the beverage industry’s legal arguments. He said the Board of Health, which is appointed by the mayor, had overreached in approving the plan, and wrote that the City Council was the only legislative body with the power to approve such a far-reaching initiative. 
  
 The administration, Justice Tingling wrote, had interpreted the board’s powers broadly enough to “create an administrative Leviathan,” capable of enacting any rules and “limited only by its own imagination.” 
  
 Advertisement Continue reading the main story 
  
 The judge also criticized the rules themselves, noting they would apply only to certain sugared drinks — dairy-based beverages like milkshakes, for instance, would be exempt — and be enforced only in certain establishments, like restaurants and delis, but not others, like convenience stores and bodegas. The rules, the judge wrote, would create “uneven enforcement, even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole.” 
  
 Lawyers for the Bloomberg administration said on Monday that it remained confident the Board of Health — which has been the conduit through which the mayor has pushed through his boldest public health initiatives, including limits on trans fats in restaurants — had “the legal authority and responsibility” to address obesity in the city. 
  
 Newsletter Sign Up Continue reading the main story Please verify you're not a robot by clicking the box. Invalid email address. Please re-enter. You must select a newsletter to subscribe to. Sign Up You will receive emails containing news content , updates and promotions from The New York Times. You may opt-out at any time. You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services. Thank you for subscribing. An error has occurred. Please try again later. View all New York Times newsletters. 
  
 Mr. Bloomberg has some experience in prevailing over legal challenges to his public health initiatives, including his requirement that fast food menus include calorie counts. 
  
 But there was no immediate consensus on Monday on the likelihood of a reversal of Justice Tingling’s ruling. 
  
 Ross Sandler, a professor at New York Law School, said city laws deemed “arbitrary and capricious” had frequently been reinstated upon appeal. But Ronald John Warfield, a civil and criminal lawyer who sued the Bloomberg administration over its cigarette-taxing policy, said he expected the appeal to fail. 
  
 Photo 
  
 “Their intention may be good,” Mr. Warfield said of the city. “They went about this with an imperial hand.” 
  
 The soft drink industry had viewed the fate of the city’s rules as a global bellwether on government regulation of sugary drinks. 
  
 In court, the industry’s lawyers, from the high-powered corporate firm Latham & Watkins, presented their argument in high dudgeon, calling the rules “ludicrous” and dreamed up by “scientists in the room, working with the mayor, creating a regulation here that is going to cost people a ton of money.” The industry also suggested that small businesses would be unfairly hurt by the rules. 
  
 Lawyers for the administration offered a more subdued, highly technical rebuttal that only occasionally addressed the broader public health reasons for the plan. At one point, a city lawyer who had mumbled his words was asked by the court reporter to repeat his points, because she could not hear him. 
  
 Advertisement Continue reading the main story 
  
 On Monday, a spokesman for the American Beverage Association said that the court decision “provides a sigh of relief.” 
  
 “With this ruling behind us, we look forward to collaborating with city leaders on solutions that will have a meaningful and lasting impact on the people of New York City,” the spokesman, Christopher Gindlesperger, said. 
  
 It is unclear if the appeal of the case will be resolved before Mr. Bloomberg leaves office at the end of this year. His would-be successors are mixed in their views of the measure and may not share his zeal on the issue. 
  
 The mayor appears increasingly preoccupied with his legacy, and recently hired two public relations advisers — a former Times editor, Arthur Pincus, and a former television reporter, Andrew Kirtzman — to shape the public perception of the Bloomberg era. 
  
 Asked on Monday if he was concerned that a drawn-out legal battle over the soda limits could spill into the administration of a successor who does not favor them, Mr. Bloomberg, sounding a bit irked, muttered, “All of our time is running out,” before saying, “I don’t know who is going to be my successor.” 
  
 The mayor added: “People are dying every day. This is not a joke. This is about real lives.” ||||| Enlarge Image Close Getty Images Bottles of soda are displayed on a shelf in New York earlier this year. 
  
 Mayor Michael Bloomberg was dealt a stinging blow on Monday when a state Supreme Court Judge quashed his plan to ban the sale of large sugary drinks in the city's restaurants and other venues. 
  
 New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg speaks to the press after at State Supreme Court judge invalidated the city's plan to limit serving sizes for sugary drinks. (Photo/Video: AP) 
  
 At a late afternoon news conference, Mr. Bloomberg and the city's top lawyer, Michael Cardozo, said they believed the judge erred in his ruling and vowed to appeal. The decision was both lauded and criticized by city officials and others. 
  
 "It would be irresponsible not to try to do everything we can to save lives," said Mr. Bloomberg, who earlier in the day called for jurisdictions across the nation to follow suit. 
  
 New York state Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling declared invalid Mr. Bloomberg's plan to prohibit restaurants, mobile food carts, delis and concessions at movie theaters, stadiums or arenas from selling sugary drinks in cups or containers larger than 16 ounces. The ban was set to begin Tuesday. 
  
 Judge Tingling determined that Mr. Bloomberg exceeded his authority by sidestepping the City Council and placing the issue before the city's Board of Health, a panel whose members were each appointed by the mayor. 
  
 Mr. Bloomberg said at the news conference he has no plans to bring the measure before the City Council. 
  
 Rick Hills, a law professor at New York University, said, "There's a sense that Bloomberg has an imperial disdain for the City Council, and this ruling says 'no more rule by mayoral decree.'" (Read the full text of the ruling) 
  
 The mayor has gone through the City Council first with some of his health initiatives but not with all of them. 
  
 Vote and Comment 
  
 In 2006, the Board of Health banned the use of artificial trans-fats in foods and required the posting of calorie counts at chain restaurants. The board's storied history also includes banning lead paint and requiring fluoride to be included in drinking water. 
  
 "Our Board of Health has always been a pioneer," Mr. Bloomberg said. "It has always been ahead of the curve, and you would expect nothing less from this city." 
  
 Jennifer Pomeranz, director of legal initiatives at Yale University's Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity, said she believes there is no legal difference between the trans-fat ban and the sugary beverage serving size restriction. 
  
 "The judge got it wrong," she said. "The authority of the department of health is the exact same authority [in both cases]. It doesn't make sense to me that the trans-fat ban is legal, and they struck this down." 
  
 While the Board of Health did approve the trans-fat ban, the City Council later voted 47-1 to incorporate the ban into the administrative code, providing express legislative approval of the board's actions. 
  
 The mayor went through the City Council approval process to achieve one his biggest public-health initiatives—on smoking. In 2002, Mr. Bloomberg convinced the council to approve a ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. More recently, the mayor convinced the council to extend that ban to parks and beaches, public plazas and marinas. 
  
 Doug Muzzio, a professor of public affairs at Baruch College, said the large sugary drink ban wasn't as simple as the smoking ban for the public to understand and support. 
  
 "There was irrefutable statistical evidence that smoking is bad for people in innumerable ways," Mr. Muzzio said. "With sugary sodas, the causal chain is less clear. Everybody who smokes suffers some adverse consequences, basically. Not everyone who drinks 16 ounce sodas has a health problem." 
  
 Aides to City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a Manhattan Democrat who is running for mayor, said last year that attorneys for the council reviewed the sugary-drink issue and determined that the Board of Health had the right to impose the regulations. Ms. Quinn has said she personally didn't back this approach, saying she preferred education over restrictions, but she said she would not try to stop the mayor from moving forward. 
  
 Other mayoral candidates offered differing views. Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, a Democrat, endorsed the proposal and supports the city's decision to appeal. Bill Thompson, who unsuccessfully attempted to unseat Mr. Bloomberg in 2009 and is running again this year, said the ruling "unmasks Mayor Bloomberg's misguided soda ban policy for what it is: a cosmetic solution to a complex problem." 
  
 Judge Tingling wrote that the regulations would "not only violate the separation of powers doctrine, it would eviscerate it." 
  
 "Such an evisceration has the potential to be more troubling than sugar sweetened beverages," he wrote. 
  
 More Judge Halts New York Ban on Large Sodas 
  
 The judge ruled the regulations are "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences," noting how there would be uneven enforcement within a single city block. The regulations didn't affect the Big Gulp at 7-11 because supermarkets and convenience stores are regulated by the state, not the city. 
  
 He wrote that regulations exclude other beverages that have significantly higher concentrations of sugar sweeteners and calories on "suspect grounds." The regulations don't limit patrons from getting refills; that provision, the judge said, appears to "gut the purpose of the rule." 
  
 At Brother Jimmy's near Union Square, the old 24-ounce glasses had already been thrown out and replaced by those only big enough to hold 16-ounces. "I don't have a problem with the mayor telling us to be more healthy, but I don't think it's his place to ban certain sized glasses," said Matt Hayek, 28, a bartender there. 
  
 At AMC Loews Village 7 theater in the East Village, Saul Farber, 27, called the ruling a "victory for personal freedom" as he sipped soda from a recently purchased 44-ounce cup. 
  
 Claire Wang, assistant professor of health policy and management at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, said she was "disappointed" by the ruling. 
  
 "The city has been on the forefront of trying to push the envelope on what we can do for population health, and from that standpoint it's very courageous," she said. "New York City has done a lot of things in public health that no one has done before, but everyone follows suit." 
  
 —Erica Orden, Mara Gay, Danny Gold and 
  
 Jacob Gershman 
  
 contributed to this article. |||||

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's office said today it will appeal a judge's 11th-hour ruling against a ban on big sugary drinks in New York City, the New York Times reports. "We plan to appeal the decision as soon as possible, and we are confident the Board of Health’s decision will ultimately be upheld," said a Bloomberg aide. Bloomberg's administration was already planning to enforce the ban and was shocked to hear of the decision by New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling. The judge said the ban was laden with loopholes and "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences." He also accused the city Board of Health of overstepping its bounds by banning a legal item without there being an immediate threat of disease, the Wall Street Journal reports. Set to kick in tomorrow, the ban would have prohibited venues from mobile food carts to restaurants from selling sugar-laden drinks bigger than 16 oz. The rules would not have affected convenience stores and supermarkets, which fall under state law.