Ohio Court Allows Cities to Enforce Ban on Flavored Tobacco

Regulations by 2FIRSTS.ai
May.20.2024
Ohio Court Allows Cities to Enforce Ban on Flavored Tobacco
Ohio Judge Rules Statewide Flavor Ban Unconstitutional, Allowing 21 Cities to Enforce Ban on Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products.

According to a report from Halfwheel on May 17th, there has been an update after 18 months regarding the ban on flavored tobacco products in Ohio. Judge Mark Serrott ruled that the recently passed statewide preemption law is unconstitutional, allowing for the enforcement of bans on the sale of flavored tobacco products in 21 cities involved in the lawsuit.

 

The controversy began in December 2022, when the city council of Columbus, Ohio, as the main plaintiff in the lawsuit, passed a ban on the sale of flavored tobacco products. In response, the Republican-controlled Ohio Legislature, during a special session focused on other issues, quickly passed a preemptive measure aimed at preventing cities from implementing stricter bans than state law.

 

In January 2023, Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican, vetoed a bill that would have banned the sale of flavored e-cigarettes, citing his longstanding opposition to the measure. Due to technical issues, the state legislature was unable to override DeWine's veto.

 

Last year, the state legislature attempted to pass a preemptive clause once again and successfully overturned Governor DeWine's second veto. Subsequently, cities like Columbus began to sue, Judge Serothe issued a temporary injunction allowing Columbus's law to remain in effect and halting the implementation of the state law.

 

However, this issue remains unresolved. The state government has stated that it will appeal the ruling by Judge Serott to the Tenth Circuit Court. Cities not involved in this lawsuit are still bound by state law.

 

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

Dalton, Georgia considers new licensing rules and caps for vape shops
Dalton, Georgia considers new licensing rules and caps for vape shops
Dalton, Georgia is weighing a proposal to require city licenses for vape shops, limit how many can operate within city limits, and impose a 1,000-foot buffer for new shops from schools and other community facilities. City officials say the ordinance would not eliminate existing vape shops outright, though some may be impacted if ownership changes or licenses expire.
Feb.05 by 2FIRSTS.ai
West Virginia Bill Seeks to Replace Per-mL Vape Liquid Tax With 50% Sales-Price Tax
West Virginia Bill Seeks to Replace Per-mL Vape Liquid Tax With 50% Sales-Price Tax
West Virginia proposes tax rate adjustments on e-cigarette devices and e-liquids, with penalties for late reporting. Effective from July 1, 2026.
Feb.02 by 2FIRSTS.ai
Singapore hikes vape penalties: users face up to S$10,000; importers up to 9 years
Singapore hikes vape penalties: users face up to S$10,000; importers up to 9 years
Singapore Parliament passes law to significantly increase penalties for e-cigarette possession, use, import, and sale, effective May 1.
Mar.09 by 2FIRSTS.ai
Bulgaria’s Disposable Vape Ban Receives Formal Approval From the European Commission
Bulgaria’s Disposable Vape Ban Receives Formal Approval From the European Commission
The European Commission has formally published its decision approving Bulgarian legislation banning the placing on the market, offering and sale of disposable e-cigarettes.
Mar.17 by 2FIRSTS.ai
PMI says it submitted evidence to FDA panel backing ZYN bid for modified-risk status
PMI says it submitted evidence to FDA panel backing ZYN bid for modified-risk status
Philip Morris International said it presented scientific evidence to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee to support its ZYN nicotine pouches seeking a modified risk tobacco product designation, which would allow the company to communicate to adult smokers that switching completely to ZYN could reduce the risk of multiple smoking-related diseases.
Jan.26 by 2FIRSTS.ai
Fontem Sues FDA Over Refusal-to-File Decision for Nicotine Pouch PMTAs
Fontem Sues FDA Over Refusal-to-File Decision for Nicotine Pouch PMTAs
According to a complaint filed on March 17 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fontem US, LLC and Texas retailer OM Investment, LLC sued the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services over FDA’s refusal-to-file decision for certain Zone nicotine pouch PMTAs.
Mar.19 by 2FIRSTS.ai