Connect with us

News

Supreme Court Rules Against Makers of Flavored Vapes Popular With Teens

Published

on

Supreme Court Rules Against Makers of Flavored Vapes Popular With Teens

The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the Food and Drug Administration had acted lawfully in rejecting applications from two manufacturers of flavored liquids used in e-cigarettes with names like Jimmy the Juice Man Peachy Strawberry, Signature Series Mom’s Pistachio and Suicide Bunny Mother’s Milk and Cookies.

In a unanimous decision written by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., the justices upheld an F.D.A. order that prohibited retailers from marketing flavored tobacco products. The court rejected claims that the agency had unfairly switched its requirements during the application process.

Justice Alito wrote that the agency’s denials of the applications were “sufficiently consistent” with agency guidance on tobacco regulations. The justices rejected a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that the agency had acted arbitrarily and capriciously, finding that the F.D.A. had not tried to change the rules in the middle of the approval process.

In the opinion, Justice Alito highlighted the possible dangers of the flavored products appealing to middle and high school students, writing that “the kaleidoscope of flavor options adds to the allure of e-cigarettes and has thus contributed to the booming demand for such products among young Americans.”

“Flavors lure kids, which is why Congress gave F.D.A. the authority to make science-based decisions on what is appropriate for our nation’s health,” said Erika Sward, the assistant vice president for nationwide advocacy at the American Lung Association, who applauded the court’s ruling.

Advertisement

The decision comes at a fraught turning point for the agency.

In recent months, leaders celebrated a 10-year low in the percent of adolescents using e-cigarettes. The F.D.A. has attributed the decline to effective messaging targeted at teenagers and to aggressive enforcement against those who market illicit vapes in flavors like Unicorn Shake and watermelon bubble gum.

The agency is also grappling with deep cuts to its tobacco division staff and its counterpart at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which gathers data on youth tobacco use. Amid thousands of staff cuts, Brian King, the director of the F.D.A.’s Center for Tobacco Products, was offered a new role in the Indian Health Service, with the option to work in Alaska or New Mexico — a tacit ouster.

Ms. Sward described the decimation of the federal tobacco control staff as “Christmas Day for big tobacco.”

“There is no one to keep the tobacco industry from flooding the market with its deadly products and no one left to count how many kids they addict,” she said.

Advertisement

The decision on Wednesday is a “ringing validation” of the F.D.A.’s work, said Mitch Zeller, a former director of the agency’s tobacco division who served during the first Trump administration and under Presidents Barack Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr. But he said its timing — a day after the deep cuts — was ironic and boded poorly for the future of limiting youth tobacco use.

“The Trump administration’s destruction of the Food and Drug Administration and the Center for Tobacco Products, in particular, imperils the ability of the center to continue to do its job on behalf of the public health,” he said.

A 2009 law, the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, requires makers of new tobacco products to obtain authorization from the F.D.A. According to the law, the manufacturers’ applications must demonstrate that their products are “appropriate for the protection of the public health.”

The agency has denied many applications under the law, including the two at issue in the case before the justices, saying the flavored liquids presented a “known and substantial risk to youth.”

The appeals court ruled last year that the agency had changed the rules in the middle of the application process, accusing it of “regulatory switcheroos” that sent the companies “on a wild-goose chase.” More formally, the court said the agency’s actions had been arbitrary and capricious.

Advertisement

In asking the Supreme Court to hear the case, Food and Drug Administration v. Wages and White Lion Investments, No. 23-1038, the agency’s lawyers cited another appeals court that had reached the opposite conclusion. The Fifth Circuit’s decision “has far-reaching consequences for public health and threatens to undermine the Tobacco Control Act’s central objective of ‘ensuring that another generation of Americans does not become addicted to nicotine and tobacco products,’” they wrote, quoting from the other appeals court’s decision.

What’s next for federal tobacco regulation is uncertain. President Trump has suggested that he will advance the interests of adults who use e-cigarettes, many of whom also use flavored vapes.

Major tobacco companies, though, have complied with F.D.A. rules and gotten approval to sell more staid products, including tobacco and menthol-flavored e-cigarettes. At least one company, Reynolds American, has donated heavily to Mr. Trump’s campaign and has made it clear that it wants the F.D.A. to crack down on the flavored e-cigarettes pouring in from China and taking away its market share.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Video: What the Texas Primary Battle Means for the Midterms

Published

on

Video: What the Texas Primary Battle Means for the Midterms

new video loaded: What the Texas Primary Battle Means for the Midterms

The first battle of the midterm elections will be the U.S. Senate primary in Texas. Our Texas bureau chief, David Goodman, explains why Democrats and Republicans across the U.S. are watching closely to see what happens in the state.

By J. David Goodman, Alexandra Ostasiewicz, June Kim and Luke Piotrowski

March 1, 2026

Continue Reading

News

Mass shooting at Austin, Texas bar leaves at least 3 dead, 14 wounded, authorities say

Published

on

Mass shooting at Austin, Texas bar leaves at least 3 dead, 14 wounded, authorities say

Gunfire rang out at a bar in Austin, Texas, early Sunday and at least three people were killed, the city’s police chief said.

Austin Police Chief Lisa Davis told reporters the shooter was killed by officers at the scene. 

Fourteen others were hospitalized and three were in critical condition, Austin-Travis County EMS Chief Robert Luckritz said.

“We received a call at 1:39 a.m. and within 57 seconds, the first paramedics and officers were on scene actively treating the patients,” Luckritz said.

Advertisement

There was no initial word on the shooter’s identity or motive.

An Austin police officer guards the scene on West 6th Street at West Avenue after a shooting on Sunday, March 1, 2026, in Austin, Texas.

Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman via AP


Davis noted how fortunate it was that there was a heavy police presence in Austin’s entertainment district at the time, enabling officers to respond quickly as bars were closing.

Advertisement

“Officers immediately transitioned … and were faced with the individual with a gun,” Davis said. “Three of our officers returned fire, killing the suspect.”

She called the shooting a “tragic, tragic” incident.

Texas Bar Shooting

Austin Police Chief Lisa Davis provides a briefing after a shooting on Sunday, March 1, 2026, near West Sixth Street and Nueces in downtown Austin, Texas.

Ricardo B. Brazziell/Austin American-Statesman via AP


Austin Mayor Kirk Watson said his heart goes out to the victims, and he praised the swift response of first responders.

Advertisement

“They definitely saved lives,” he said.

Davis said federal law enforcement is aiding the investigation.

Continue Reading

News

A long-buried recording and the Supreme Court of old (CT+) : Consider This from NPR

Published

on

A long-buried recording and the Supreme Court of old (CT+) : Consider This from NPR
Recently, movie critic Bob Mondello brought us a story about how he found a 63-year-old recording of his father arguing a case before the Supreme Court. The next day, he bumped into Nina Totenberg, NPR’s legal affairs correspondent, in the newsroom. They were talking so animatedly that we ushered them into a studio to continue the conversation.To unlock this and other bonus content — and listen to every episode sponsor-free — sign up for NPR+ at plus.npr.org. Regular episodes haven’t changed and remain available every weekday.Email us at considerthis@npr.org.
Continue Reading

Trending