The high court ruled that vaping companies can challenge FDA decisions in more courts, expanding legal options.
A recent decision from the United States Supreme Court has opened the door for bringing a vaping lawsuit, specifically to challenge decisions made by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in courts beyond the agency’s home base. This ruling affects how lawsuits related to federal restrictions on e-cigarettes can move forward and could change the course of future legal battles between businesses and regulators. It also allows these companies more say in where they bring their cases, which could influence outcomes in their favor.
The case involved R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company, which had been selling flavored vaping products until the FDA began applying stricter rules under the Tobacco Control Act. When the agency declined to approve the company’s Vuse Alto line, it effectively blocked a large share of the company’s sales. The FDA’s rejection was based on concerns about flavors that could appeal to minors, a key focus in ongoing efforts to reduce teen vaping. R.J. Reynolds joined with small businesses in Texas that sold its products and filed a legal challenge in that state.
Normally, companies must file lawsuits against federal agencies either where the agency is located or where the company is based. But the Supreme Court found that businesses affected by federal decisions can also sue in their own states. This gives retailers and other third-party sellers more options when contesting agency rules, even if they weren’t directly targeted by the original decision.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the majority opinion, joined by six other justices. She stated that the FDA decision had real consequences for businesses that sell e-cigarettes and that the law allows those businesses to push back. The ruling doesn’t change the FDA’s authority, but it gives companies more tools to respond when their ability to sell certain products is restricted.
Two justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, dissented. They argued that allowing businesses to file in more courts would create uneven results and encourage companies to search for judges more likely to rule in their favor. This practice, often referred to as “judge shopping,” could lead to inconsistency in how regulations are enforced across the country.
Supporters of strict vaping rules, including groups focused on public health and youth smoking prevention, criticized the decision to allow a vaping lawsuit. They expressed concern that the ruling may slow down or weaken enforcement, as legal challenges stretch across different states with different judges. Still, the decision does not undo the FDA’s ability to restrict flavored vaping products, which the Supreme Court upheld in an earlier case this year.
That previous ruling backed the agency’s choice to keep most sweet-flavored e-cigarettes off the market. The court agreed at that time that the FDA acted within its powers when it blocked products that could contribute to youth addiction. In contrast, this new ruling centers on how businesses can respond when they are harmed by those types of decisions.
Attorneys representing the vaping company welcomed the outcome. They said it allows small businesses and retailers who rely on these products for income to be heard in court, instead of being boxed into far-off or unfriendly legal venues. They believe it makes the legal system more open to the people most affected by these regulatory calls.
This decision arrives at a time when the market for e-cigarettes is under increasing pressure. As rules grow tighter, the fight between government agencies and private companies continues to play out in courtrooms. For now, this ruling may shift that fight closer to home for the businesses involved, changing how they prepare their legal strategies and where those cases will unfold.
Sources:
Supreme Court sides with e-cigarette companies in FDA vaping lawsuit
Supreme Court allows vape companies to pick courts to hear challenges
