Mexican Presidential Candidate Proposes for National Police Academy to Regulate Vapes

Regulations by 2FIRSTS.ai
Mar.07.2024
Mexican Presidential Candidate Proposes for National Police Academy to Regulate Vapes
Mexican presidential candidate Jorge Álvarez Máynez proposes a national police academy to regulate e-cigarettes and marijuana, emphasizing tax revenue importance.

According to infobae, on March 7th, Mexican opposition citizen movement (MC) presidential candidate Jorge Álvarez Máynez proposed the creation of a national police academy on Wednesday (March 6th) to promote regulation of e-cigarettes or marijuana.

 

During a speech at the Mexican Autonomous Institute of Technology (ITAM), the candidate emphasized the necessity of reforms to Mexico's security and judicial systems. He stated that the country needs a police academy more than the large-scale prisons proposed by his opponent, Xóchitl Gálvez. He argued that because Mexico faces issues of inequality, individuals with higher social status may be able to evade imprisonment.

 

At the same time, the candidate advocates for regulating aerosol products, such as e-cigarettes. These products are entering Mexico through illegal channels and are not being regulated by the health authorities.

 

These devices can be found within a one kilometer radius. Prohibition is not the solution; regulation is what is appropriate for the country.

 

He believes that prohibition will only fuel the black market and deprive the country of much-needed tax revenue. At the same time, Alvarez Martinez emphasizes the importance of taxation, saying, "Mexico can tax items currently being sold in the illegal market in Mexico because if tax revenue is not increased, you will never be able to establish a decent healthcare system or a decent education system."

 

We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

Wisconsin Vape Directory One Year On: Retailer Reports Four Store Closures and 70% Staff Cuts
Wisconsin Vape Directory One Year On: Retailer Reports Four Store Closures and 70% Staff Cuts
Wisconsin's electronic vaping device directory has been fully enforced for more than a year, and local vape retailers say the reduced range of eligible products has contributed to declining sales, store closures and layoffs. Johnny Vapes owner Ben Hall said he has closed four of seven locations and cut about 70% of his staff. State law bars the sale of vaping devices not listed on the Wisconsin Department of Revenue directory and allows penalties of $1,000 per day for each unlisted device sold or offered for sale. In April 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit allowed enforcement of the law to continue.
Regulations
Oct.10
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the FDA’s denial of MH Global LLC’s applications to market flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). The court ruled that FDA’s comparative-efficacy framework, which requires applicants to show that flavored products provide greater cessation or switching benefits than tobacco-flavored alternatives, is consistent with the Tobacco Control Act’s “appropriate for the protection of the public health” standard. The court also found that FDA was not required to establish the framework through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Aug.26
JTI Research Finds 31% of UK Respondents Offered Illicit Tobacco, While 63% of Ennis Packs Lack Duty Marks
JTI Research Finds 31% of UK Respondents Offered Illicit Tobacco, While 63% of Ennis Packs Lack Duty Marks
Multiple JTI-backed studies in the UK and Ireland indicate that illicit tobacco remains visible across consumer interactions and local markets. In the UK, JTI research found that 31% of respondents said they had been offered illicit tobacco products. In Ireland’s Ennis area, a JTI-commissioned empty pack survey found that 63% of sampled cigarette packs did not carry Irish duty-paid markings. The findings come from industry research rather than official government estimates of illicit tobacco market size, but highlight continued concerns among regulators, legitimate retailers and tobacco companies over illicit trade.
Aug.19
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore and four authorized U.S. CCELL distributors are asking a California federal court to permanently dismiss a core antitrust claim brought by direct purchasers. Plaintiffs allege that Smoore coordinated minimum wholesale prices, customer allocation and limits on price competition among distributors, amounting to a per se unlawful horizontal conspiracy. The defendants say the alleged conduct reflects ordinary vertical relationships between a manufacturer and its distributors. The court previously dismissed a similar claim, and the latest dispute centers on whether the second amended complaint adds sufficient facts to establish a horizontal agreement.
Sep.14
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Three R.J. Reynolds companies are seeking to intervene in a lawsuit filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY challenging the FDA's 2021 PMTA final rule. The companies dispute how the agency uses Acceptance and Filing reviews and completeness determinations to establish when the Tobacco Control Act's 180-day decision period begins. Reynolds has also linked prolonged PMTA reviews to competition from unauthorized vaping products. The FDA, meanwhile, has been accelerating reviews and reducing its backlog.
Sep.14
Yinghe-Controlled Vape Maker SKE Ordered to Post £569,039 Security as It Pursues Crystal Bar Design Infringement Case in UK
Yinghe-Controlled Vape Maker SKE Ordered to Post £569,039 Security as It Pursues Crystal Bar Design Infringement Case in UK
The UK High Court has ordered Chinese vape manufacturer Shenzhen SKE Technology to provide £569,039 ($776,000) in security for costs in its design infringement proceedings against Vapepen London and other defendants over its Crystal Bar vape product. The court did not accept the defendants’ main argument that recovering costs from a China-based company would face significant enforcement obstacles, but found that SKE had not sufficiently disclosed its own financial position. The order is procedural and does not determine the underlying infringement claims.
News
Aug.21