US Tobacco Companies Challenge California Flavored Tobacco Ban

Nov.30.2022
US Tobacco Companies Challenge California Flavored Tobacco Ban
Tobacco companies challenge California's ban on flavored tobacco products in the US Supreme Court.

On November 29th, tobacco company R.J. Reynolds, also known as Reynold Tobacco Holdings, joined other tobacco companies in a joint request to the United States Supreme Court. They requested an emergency order to block California's ban on flavored tobacco products.


Two years ago, the ban was initially passed by the state legislature, but it never went into effect after tobacco companies collected a significant number of "no" votes. However, nearly two-thirds of voters approved the prohibition of selling electronic cigarette products, and the law will take effect on December 21st.


Supporters of the ban state that this law is necessary to curb the increasing number of young people who smoke.


A study has found that one in six high school students in the United States use e-cigarettes or tobacco products.


Renault filed a federal lawsuit and raised objections to it, but the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Renault's emergency motion.


Tobacco giants argue that the authority to ban flavors belongs to federal law. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act grants the Food and Drug Administration the power to regulate tobacco. These companies are represented by Noel Francisco, who previously served as the top lawyer for the Trump administration at the Supreme Court.


California will become the second state in the United States to implement a ban on the sale of all flavored tobacco products, following in the footsteps of Massachusetts. Several cities in California, including Los Angeles and San Diego, have already implemented their own bans, and a few states have prohibited the sale of flavored electronic cigarette products.


2FIRSTS will continue to provide ongoing coverage of this issue, with updates available on the 2FIRSTS app. Scan the QR code below to download the app.



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.

Research | Swedish Study Finds Oral Lesions in 79% of Examined Nicotine Pouch Users, With Distinct Tissue Responses
Research | Swedish Study Finds Oral Lesions in 79% of Examined Nicotine Pouch Users, With Distinct Tissue Responses
A new Swedish study found oral mucosal lesions in 79% of examined nicotine pouch users and 89% of tobacco-derived snus users, with different tissue-response patterns between the two categories. For manufacturers and regulators, the findings shift attention toward product formulation, flavouring, pouch materials and local oral exposure, not only whether a product contains tobacco. The study found no higher prevalence of caries or periodontal disease, but it could not establish causality, long-term outcomes or differences between individual products or designs.
Special Report
Jul.27
BAT Regional Director Fred Monteiro Supports Spain’s Nicotine Rules but Opposes 0.99mg Nicotine Pouch Limit
BAT Regional Director Fred Monteiro Supports Spain’s Nicotine Rules but Opposes 0.99mg Nicotine Pouch Limit
Spanish newspaper El Confidencial interviewed Fred Monteiro, Regional Director for Americas and Europe at British American Tobacco (BAT). Monteiro said BAT supports setting regulatory limits for nicotine products but opposes Spain’s proposed 0.99mg nicotine-per-pouch limit, arguing that such a restriction could affect adult smokers’ transition to alternatives. He said nicotine regulation should be based on scientific evidence and harm reduction principles. Monteiro also said smoke-free products now account for around 25% of BAT’s Americas and Europe business and nearly 30% of its Europe business
BAT
Jul.30
Canadian Court Allows Juul and Altria Vape Class Action to Move Forward Over Youth Marketing Claims
Canadian Court Allows Juul and Altria Vape Class Action to Move Forward Over Youth Marketing Claims
A Quebec Superior Court has allowed a class action lawsuit against Juul Labs and Altria Group related to vaping products to proceed, involving allegations concerning marketing practices, youth exposure and corporate responsibility. The ruling only allows the case to move forward and does not represent a finding that Juul or Altria are legally liable. The case highlights continued legal risks facing vape companies regarding product marketing, youth protection and corporate accountability.
Jul.28
Australia’s TGA Places Nicotine Pouches Under Therapeutic Goods Rules From July 24, Blocking Imports of Unapproved Products
Australia’s TGA Places Nicotine Pouches Under Therapeutic Goods Rules From July 24, Blocking Imports of Unapproved Products
Australia is strengthening controls on nicotine pouches under its existing therapeutic goods regulatory framework. According to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), nicotine pouch products must meet regulatory requirements, and unapproved products cannot be legally imported. The move follows Australia’s broader approach of maintaining strict oversight of nicotine products, including nicotine-containing vapes. As nicotine pouches expand globally, Australia’s regulatory approach highlights growing differences in how countries manage emerging smoke-free nicotine products.
Regulations
Jul.27
Ohio Supreme Court Weighs Whether State Consumer Law Can Restrict Flavored Vape Sales
Ohio Supreme Court Weighs Whether State Consumer Law Can Restrict Flavored Vape Sales
The Ohio Supreme Court is hearing a case involving flavored vape sales and whether state authorities can use consumer protection laws to take action against retailers selling unauthorized vape products. Ohio officials argue that selling unauthorized flavored vapes may constitute consumer deception, while retailers argue that tobacco product regulation falls under federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority and that states cannot impose additional restrictions through consumer laws. The case could affect the scope of state-level vape regulation across the United States.
Aug.06
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Drug Regulator Target Illegal Vape Sales Disguised as Medical Devices, Define Six Violations
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Drug Regulator Target Illegal Vape Sales Disguised as Medical Devices, Define Six Violations
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Jiangsu Provincial Medical Products Administration have issued a joint notice targeting illegal production and sales of vape products disguised as medical devices. The notice identifies six categories of violations, including obtaining medical licenses through false materials, misusing medical device credentials, expanding production beyond approved scopes, and using medical device-related online platforms to promote or sell vape products. The action is based on China’s tobacco and medical device regulations and aims to strengthen vape oversight and consumer protection.
Aug.04