Litigation Tracker

Litigation is an important tool for both defending and advancing public health policy. Below you will find information and official court documents from select lawsuits within the focus areas of the Public Health Law Center, including commercial tobacco control and healthy eating. Additionally, we have included some cases relevant to cross-cutting issues that affect public health, such as preemption and First Amendment considerations.
 
In some of the cases included here, the Public Health Law Center has supported public health goals as an amicus curiae, or friend-of-the-court, by filing briefs with relevant information that the court might wish to consider in addition to information presented by the litigants. You can read more about the Function and Role of Amicus Briefs in Public Health Litigation.
 
This tool was previously known as the Amicus Briefs Database. This modified resource will reflect new content and the expansion of previous content.

Litigation Tracker

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al. v. City of Edina et al. (2020)

Industry challenges a local flavored tobacco product ordinance adopted by the City of Edina, Minnesota, arguing that the ordinance is preempted by the Tobacco Control Act.

State: Minnesota
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Pending

African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council et al. v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services et al. (2020)

Public health groups sue the FDA over its failure to prohibit the sale of menthol cigarettes.

State: California
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Pending

Vapor Technology Association et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2019)

E-cigarette manufacturers and trade group challenged premarket review deadlines set by a federal district court in Maryland under the Administrative Procedure Act and on Constitutional grounds.

State: Kentucky
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Resolved

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company et al v. County of Los Angeles et al. (2020)

Tobacco Industry challenges the County of Los Angeles’ flavored tobacco product sales restriction, arguing the ordinance is expressly and impliedly preempted by federal law.

State: California
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Pending

Cigar Association of America et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2016)

Cigar and pipe tobacco trade associations filed suit against the FDA, challenging the deeming rule as it applies to cigars and pipe tobacco. The suit is ongoing, but has resulted in a suspension of warning labels for cigars and pipe tobacco and the premarket review process specifically for premium cigars.

State: Washington D.C.
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Pending

CA Smoke and Vape Association, Inc. et al v. County of Los Angeles, et al. (2020)

E-cigarette industry trade association and smoke shop challenges the County of Los Angeles’ flavored tobacco product ordinance, arguing that the ordinance is preempted by federal law and is unconstitutionally vague.

State: California
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Resolved

Philip Morris USA Inc. and Sherman Group Holdings, LLC v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al. (2020)

Industry challenges the FDA’s 2020 graphic warning label rule on First Amendment grounds. 

State: Washington D.C.
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Pending

CA Smoke and Vape Association, Inc. et al v. City of Palmdale (2020)

Industry trade association challenges City of Palmdale’s flavored tobacco product sales restriction, arguing that the ordinance is expressly and impliedly preempted by federal law.

State: California
Most Recent Decision: 2020
Status: Resolved