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.

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
Major U.S.  Vape Distributor Demand Vape Pays at Least $300,000 for White House Lobbying Amid Enforcement Pressure
Major U.S. Vape Distributor Demand Vape Pays at Least $300,000 for White House Lobbying Amid Enforcement Pressure
New York vape distributor Ecto World, which operates as Demand Vape, hired political consultant Roger Stone to lobby the Executive Office of the President on regulation of vaping and related products while facing state enforcement and multiple lawsuits. Public lobbying disclosures show that Ecto World paid at least $300,000 for the work through June 30, 2026. Separately, New York State announced in March that more than 28,500 pounds of vaping products tied to the company had been seized, while New York City and the state have pursued legal or enforcement actions. Public records do not show that the lobbying directly changed any specific regulatory or enforcement outcome.
Sep.08
South Korea Constitutional Court Upholds Volume-Based E-Liquid Tax, With Challenged Rates at KRW 370 and KRW 628 per Milliliter
South Korea Constitutional Court Upholds Volume-Based E-Liquid Tax, With Challenged Rates at KRW 370 and KRW 628 per Milliliter
South Korea's Constitutional Court has upheld fixed taxes on nicotine-containing e-cigarette liquids based on solution volume, ruling that challenged provisions imposing KRW 370 per milliliter in individual consumption tax and KRW 628 per milliliter in tobacco consumption tax do not violate the Constitution. The cases stemmed from historical disputes involving importers that reported nicotine as being extracted from tobacco stems rather than leaves. South Korea has since broadened its tobacco definition to include synthetic nicotine, while current tax laws provide reduced rates for certain products not derived from tobacco.
Sep.18
Imperial Brands Sees Double-Digit NGP Growth as Sixth Year of Tobacco Revenue Gains Backs £1.5 Billion Buyback
Imperial Brands Sees Double-Digit NGP Growth as Sixth Year of Tobacco Revenue Gains Backs £1.5 Billion Buyback
Imperial Brands reaffirmed its FY26 guidance in its October 8 pre-close trading update, forecasting double-digit net revenue growth in next-generation products and share gains across heated tobacco, vape and modern oral. Tobacco net revenue is expected to grow at a low-single-digit rate, marking a sixth consecutive year of growth. The company has completed its £1.45 billion FY26 share repurchase and announced a £1.5 billion buyback for FY27. Group adjusted operating profit is expected to increase 3% to 5%, while free cash flow is forecast to exceed £2.2 billion.
Oct.09
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
Less than a week after JUUL2 received U.S. FDA marketing authorization on August 28, 2026, JUUL Labs was sued for patent infringement in federal court in Delaware. AJ Marketing LLC filed the complaint on September 3, alleging that both JUUL 1 and JUUL2 infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,851,068 B2. The patent covers aspects of programmable electronic vaporization devices, including controls over dose delivery, usage frequency and operating parameters. The plaintiff is seeking reasonable royalties and ongoing royalties tied to the remaining life of the patent. JUUL has not yet publicly responded to the case.
Sep.10
Australia Extends Illicit Tobacco Crackdown From Tougher Penalties to Customs and Logistics Supply Chains
Australia Extends Illicit Tobacco Crackdown From Tougher Penalties to Customs and Logistics Supply Chains
Australia's federal government introduced a new illicit tobacco enforcement bill on September 10 that would strengthen evidentiary presumptions, representative sampling, seizure and forfeiture procedures, proceeds-of-crime powers and obligations for customs and logistics operators. The proposal follows the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Act 2026, which took effect in August and increased penalties while expanding investigative and asset-recovery tools. Together, the reforms extend Australia's crackdown from tougher criminal sanctions into import, logistics and evidentiary enforcement.
Sep.14