Synopsis 

On November 8, 2022, California voters approved a measure to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products, including e-liquids, in the state, with exceptions for flavored shisha used in hookah, premium cigars, and loose leaf tobacco. R.J. Reynolds and other tobacco industry entities filed suit on 11/9/2022 seeking an injunction and declaratory relief against the measure. 

Why it matters for public health 

Flavored tobacco products are exceptionally more popular than unflavored and tobacco-flavored products, whether combusted as with cigarettes or aerosolized as with electronic smoking devices or otherwise consumed. Flavored tobacco products are especially popular among youth and underage consumers of tobacco products, and flavors are widely the attributive factor in youth initiation to tobacco products as well as continued use of the same. One of the single-most impactful tobacco control measures a local or state authority can undertake to curb tobacco product use is the prohibition on flavored tobacco product sales. 

Background 

California’s state legislature considered and approved a measure in 2020 to restrict the sale of flavored tobacco products in the state, with exceptions for flavored shisha, premium cigars, and loose leaf products. R.J. Reynolds et al sued, unsuccessfully, to prevent the law from enactment on the grounds that it was preempted by the Tobacco Control Act. Following this effort, R.J. Reynolds and the tobacco industry supported a referendum proposal to place the state law, known in shorthand as SB793, on the general ballot for 2022; the referendum petition succeeded and the law – which has not yet come into force – was coded Proposition 31. A “yes” vote for this proposition would mean supporting the law’s enactment, and a “no” vote for this proposition would mean its repeal. On 11/8/2022, California voters approved 62%-38% Proposition 31. R.J. Reynolds et al filed suit on 11/9/2022 in the Southern District of California. 

Proceedings 

This case has not yet undergone any proceedings beyond the initial complaint; PHLC will update this section as the case develops. R.J. Reynolds et al’s complaint raises the same arguments that have been previously raised – and dismissed – by state and federal courts; see R.J. Reynolds Co. et al v. Becerra et al (2020). 

Litigation Status (OPEN) 

R.J. Reynolds et al filed their complaint on 11/9/2022; PHLC will update this section as the case develops. 

Return to Litigation Tracker