WASHINGTON, DC — A lawsuit designed to ban the sale of Oreo cookies to children is an attack on individual responsibility and parental rights, Libertarians say.

“Americans don’t need junk lawsuits to protect them from junk foods,” said Geoffrey Neale, national chairman of the Libertarian Party. “Parents should be the ones who decide what their kids can eat — not judges, politicians or cookie cops.”

San Francisco attorney Stephen Joseph alleges in a lawsuit against Nabisco, Inc., that Oreo cookies are a health hazard because they are made with partially hydrogenated vegetable oil, also called trans fat. Joseph claims that the cookies, which have been manufactured since 1912, are too dangerous for children to eat.

His lawsuit, filed in Marin County Superior Court this month, asks for an injunction ordering Kraft Foods to stop selling Oreo cookies to children in California.

Joseph’s suit is similar to one filed last year against McDonald’s, Burger King, and other fast-food giants, which was rejected by a federal court. Restaurant industry observers say the legal strategies are part of the larger “war on fatty foods,” which also includes legislation in several states to ban snack foods and soft drinks in public schools.

But the problem with looking to courts and legislators to improve public health, Libertarians say, is that it tramples on the notion of individual and parental responsibility.

“It’s condescending for people like Joseph to assume that other adults are too dumb to know the difference between snack foods and health foods,” Neale said. “And it’s downright offensive to ask courts to insert themselves between parent and child and start pulling snack foods out of kitchen cabinets.”

Joseph’s central legal claim is that Nabisco can he held liable under the California civil code because trans fat is not “known to be unsafe by the ordinary consumer.”

“Let’s set aside for a moment the dubious claim that Oreo cookies — which Americans have been eating for 91 years with no apparent ill effects — can be considered a health hazard,” Neale said.

“The fact remains that thanks to the free flow of information, it’s ridiculous to claim that the dangers of fatty foods are unknown,” Neale said.

Joseph admits he didn’t decide Oreos were “unsafe” until he read about hydrogenated fat in a newspaper article two years ago, he noted.

“Doesn’t that mean that millions of other Americans are just as informed as he is, and can decide for themselves whether this substance is too dangerous for their kids?” Neale asked. “Calling trans fat a hidden health threat doesn’t pass the laugh test.”

The free market is already working in other ways to safeguard public health, Neale explained. A few examples:

* The Kraft Corp. is already testing alternatives to trans fats in its snack foods.

* McDonald’s restaurants, in an attempt to catch up with competitors who are offering healthier menus, has unveiled a plan to introduce low- fat French fries.

* Frito-Lay, owned by PepsiCo. Inc. announced last year that it would eliminate trans fat from Doritos and other snacks.

“It’s clear that when it comes to protecting public health, the free market is way ahead of the food police,” Neale said. “The fact is that judges, politicians, and litigation-happy health nuts pose a far greater threat to your freedom than Oreos pose to your health.”