US Judge Rules Against FDA on Premium Cigar Regulation

Jul.07.2022
US Judge Rules Against FDA on Premium Cigar Regulation
A US judge ruled FDA's decision on regulating premium cigars as arbitrary and capricious, asks for briefing on decision reversal.

On Tuesday, a federal judge in the U.S. ruled that the FDA's decision to regulate premium cigars under the same federal laws as cigarettes and other tobacco products was arbitrary and capricious.


District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington D.C. has stated that the FDA disregarded relevant data on the health risks associated with high-quality cigars. He has requested the FDA and industry groups that question this regulation, including the Premium Cigar Association and the Cigar Rights of America, to submit briefs explaining why he should overturn the FDA's decision.


Michael Edney, the attorney for the plaintiff firm Steptoe & Johnson, stated that the family-owned manufacturer and retailer of high-quality cigars has long believed that the FDA has mishandled its regulation of premium cigars. He expressed gratitude for the court's ruling and the opportunity to pursue further legal action on this matter.


At this time, it is not possible to immediately reach out to the FDA for comment on this matter.


The focus of the lawsuit is the so-called certification rules passed by the agency in 2016, in which it exercised regulatory authority over a wide range of tobacco products, including premium cigars and cigarettes, under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.


The plaintiff stated that the organization considered and rejected high-quality cigars before finalizing its regulations, as well as during additional consultations in 2017 and 2018.


According to them, the FDA's regulations require cigar manufacturers to register their products annually and provide a list of ingredients for each product. They also require all products to undergo laboratory testing, which is impractical for "craftsmen" who produce high-quality handmade cigars.


Industry organizations state that unlike cigarettes and e-cigarettes, high-quality cigars are not appealing to young people and are not associated with addiction. They cite research indicating that young people are unlikely to use high-quality cigars, and those who do use them are unlikely to smoke cigars on a regular basis, thus not contributing to increased death rates.


On Monday, Mehta agreed that the FDA did not adequately consider the studies cited by the plaintiffs and instead claimed "there is no evidence to suggest" that high-quality cigars pose less of a health risk.


The judge wrote that when an institution unequivocally claims there is no evidence, while in fact there are relevant documented pieces of evidence, and the institution ignores or disregards it, it acts arbitrarily and capriciously.


The case is the lawsuit filed by the U.S. Cigar Association against the FDA in the District Court of Columbia, case number 16-cv-01460.


This article is a compilation of information from third-party sources and is intended solely for educational and informational purposes. All copyrights to the compiled information belong to the original media and authors, and any infringements should be reported for prompt 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.

Malaysia Withdraws Appeal Against Liquid Nicotine Ruling as Vape Regulation Framework Enters New Phase
Malaysia Withdraws Appeal Against Liquid Nicotine Ruling as Vape Regulation Framework Enters New Phase
Malaysia’s government has withdrawn its appeal against a High Court ruling concerning the regulatory status of liquid nicotine used in vape and e-cigarette products, according to reports by New Straits Times, Free Malaysia Today and CodeBlue on August 18, 2026. The Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled on May 15 that the government’s decision to remove liquid nicotine from the scheduled poisons list under the Poisons Act 1952 was irrational and made without proper consultation with the Poisons Board. The withdrawal ends the government’s appeal process, while the future regulatory framework for nicotine vape products remains under discussion.
Aug.21
Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
2Firsts reviewed the original federal court complaint filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY on Sept. 2 challenging FDA’s 2021 PMTA rule. The lawsuit questions whether FDA’s review process complies with the Tobacco Control Act’s 180-day timeline, even as the agency moves to accelerate PMTA reviews and issues more marketing orders. Drawing on the complaint, FDA records, government audits and recent court rulings, 2Firsts examines the legal arguments, supporting evidence and potential implications for the U.S. tobacco review system.
Regulations
Sep.03
Snowplus Enters Japan’s FamilyMart Network With Zero-Nicotine NEO Line and Kishidan Campaign
Snowplus Enters Japan’s FamilyMart Network With Zero-Nicotine NEO Line and Kishidan Campaign
Snowplus distributor H&S said the zero-nicotine, zero-tar NEO vaping line will begin rolling out across FamilyMart stores in Japan from September 14, 2026, excluding some locations. The DASH line will also be sold at selected FamilyMart stores in southern Kyushu and Okinawa. Snowplus simultaneously named Japanese rock band Kishidan as a brand ambassador, combining convenience-store distribution with a broader consumer marketing push in Japan.
Sep.15
Charlie’s Says 30 PACHA Vape SKUs Tentatively Identified for FDA’s Non-Priority Enforcement Public List
Charlie’s Says 30 PACHA Vape SKUs Tentatively Identified for FDA’s Non-Priority Enforcement Public List
Charlie’s Holdings said the U.S. Food and Drug Administration notified the company on June 23, 2026, that 30 PACHA vape SKUs with submitted PMTAs had been tentatively identified for inclusion on a planned public-facing FDA webpage. Under enforcement guidance issued by FDA in May, the webpage is intended to identify certain unauthorized products for which the agency generally does not intend to prioritize enforcement of premarket authorization requirements. Charlie’s disclosed the development alongside second-quarter revenue of $3.8 million, up 116% year over year.
Aug.25
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
UK HMRC Unveils Red and Yellow Transitional Vape Duty Stamps Ahead of October Tax Launch
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has released sample images of the UK’s transitional vaping duty stamps, showing red and yellow versions ahead of the new Vaping Products Duty and Vaping Duty Stamps Scheme starting on October 1, 2026. Transitional stamps contain physical security features but no digital scanning function. Approved businesses may purchase them through November 30 and affix them through December 31. HMRC has not stated that the red and yellow samples represent different product categories or tax statuses.
Regulations
Sep.02
U.S. Appeals Court Says BAT Must Face Class Action Over Cigarette Labels
U.S. Appeals Court Says BAT Must Face Class Action Over Cigarette Labels
A U.S. appeals court ruled that British American Tobacco (BAT) must continue facing a consumer class action lawsuit over cigarette labels. The ruling allows the case to proceed but does not determine that BAT violated the law or is liable for damages. The case highlights ongoing legal risks facing major tobacco companies related to product labeling, consumer disclosures and product liability claims.
Jul.31