Portland School District Sues E-Cigarette Company Juul Labs

Oct.05.2022
Portland School District Sues E-Cigarette Company Juul Labs
Portland Public Schools sues Juul Labs for promoting e-cigarettes to teens, leading to illegal drug abuse.

The Portland Public Schools district has become the latest district to sue e-cigarette company Juul Labs, accusing the company of marketing its products to teenagers and contributing to the illegal drug use in the city's schools.


According to a lawsuit filed in the US District Court in Portland, approximately half of the disciplinary actions related to drug abuse in the 2021-22 school year were due to vaping and e-cigarette use.


As a result, the school district has added information on electronic cigarettes and nicotine addiction to its "Insight" curriculum, which is a 14-week student and parent education program aimed at students who violate the district's drug and tobacco policies.


A lawsuit alleges that, similar to the nationwide rise in electronic cigarette usage, there is a high rate of teenagers in Portland public schools using e-cigarettes. The lawsuit states that from 2017 to 2019, the usage of e-cigarettes among 11th-grade students in Multnomah County rose from approximately 10% to 21%. Juul's founders, Adam Bowen and James Monsees, are accused of developing a highly addictive product to expand their loyal user base and using tactics similar to the tobacco industry to market it to young people.


It accuses the company of using child-friendly flavors to appeal to young people without ensuring that the flavorings can be safely inhaled.


A recently filed lawsuit alleges that an electronic cigarette manufacturer has been engaging in both environmental pollution and extortion. The school district is requesting that a judge order the company to cease enabling teenage addiction and award damages to help cover costs for prevention education, addiction treatment, and on-campus monitoring. They are also seeking punitive damages.


Statement:


This article is compiled from third-party information and is solely for the purpose of industry exchange and learning.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS, and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the truthfulness and accuracy of the article's contents. The compilation of this article is only for industry exchange and research purposes.


Due to limitations in translation ability, the translated article may not accurately reflect the original text. Please refer to the original text for accuracy.


2FIRSTS is entirely aligned with the Chinese government on any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and international views and positions.


The copyright of the compiled information belongs to the original media outlet and author. If there is any copyright infringement, please contact us for removal.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

Pennsylvania Vape Directory Enforcement Starts Oct. 19, Barring Retail Sales of Unlisted Products
Pennsylvania Vape Directory Enforcement Starts Oct. 19, Barring Retail Sales of Unlisted Products
Pennsylvania's Act 57 vape directory regime will reach the end of its 120-day inventory transition period on Oct. 19. Nicotine-containing e-cigarettes intended for retail sale in the state that are not listed on the Attorney General's ENDS directory will then be barred from retail sale and treated as contraband subject to seizure, forfeiture and destruction. Manufacturers face annual product certification, brand- and style-based fees and a minimum $50,000 surety bond, while retailers and wholesalers must source through licensed channels and monitor the directory.
Regulations
Oct.08
U.S. Rep. Krishnamoorthi Questions FDA Over Planned PMTA Rewrite, Seeks Communications With Altria and Reynolds
U.S. Rep. Krishnamoorthi Questions FDA Over Planned PMTA Rewrite, Seeks Communications With Altria and Reynolds
U.S. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi on Oct. 6 questioned the FDA over its plan to reassess and potentially replace the 2021 PMTA regulatory framework, asking the agency to identify provisions it may change or eliminate, state whether current scientific evidentiary standards will be maintained, and disclose communications with Altria, Reynolds and other parties challenging the rule. Krishnamoorthi led a congressional investigation into JUUL and youth vaping in 2019 and has since remained active on e-cigarette regulation and enforcement.
Regulations
Oct.08
Special Report | From New York to Washington: How FDA’s Tobacco Center Is Reworking Product Review
Special Report | From New York to Washington: How FDA’s Tobacco Center Is Reworking Product Review
FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products is reshaping how it approaches tobacco product review. Based on 2Firsts’ on-site reporting in New York and Washington, this report traces CTP’s emerging direction: stronger links between PMTA and tobacco harm reduction, more category-specific review, greater emphasis on decision-relevant science, more predictable timelines and expanded use of sPMTA for product modifications. CTP also acknowledged major constraints, including just nine PMTA review teams, persistent backlogs and limits on hiring capacity.
Regulations
Oct.08
Iowa Sets November 16 Vape Directory Launch: Unlisted Products Face Sales Ban, Manufacturers $1,000 Daily Fines per Product
Iowa Sets November 16 Vape Directory Launch: Unlisted Products Face Sales Ban, Manufacturers $1,000 Daily Fines per Product
Iowa plans to publish its first vapor products directory on November 16, 2026, after which products not listed will be prohibited from sale or offer for sale in the state. The Department of Revenue expects to begin penalty enforcement on December 17, following an initial 21-business-day period focused on compliance education. Under House File 2677, retailers, distributors and wholesalers selling unlisted products face civil penalties of $300 per product per day, while manufacturers face $1,000 per product per day. Eligibility extends to FDA-authorized products and certain products meeting historical marketing and pending PMTA requirements. The directory program resumed after a federal appeals court vacated a preliminary injunction in July 2026.
Regulations
Nov.05
GAO Audit Finds Nearly 132,000 FDA Tobacco Applications Waiting an Average 1,266 Days as Nicotine Pouch Pilot Practices Move Into Vape PMTA Reviews
GAO Audit Finds Nearly 132,000 FDA Tobacco Applications Waiting an Average 1,266 Days as Nicotine Pouch Pilot Practices Move Into Vape PMTA Reviews
A U.S. Government Accountability Office audit found that 131,915 tobacco product applications submitted to the FDA since 2018 remained without a final review as of December 31, 2025, with pending applications waiting an average of 1,266 days. GAO also found FDA lacks the data needed to systematically determine whether scientific reviews meet applicable timelines. HHS agreed to upgrade the agency's tracking systems. At the same time, FDA has begun applying lessons from its nicotine pouch PMTA pilot to e-cigarette reviews, while changes to enforcement policy and electronic submissions are making the specific stage of a PMTA increasingly relevant to market access.
FDA
Oct.03
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