In August 2025, 15 youth plaintiffs between the ages of 8 to 17 in Wisconsin filed a lawsuit against the Wisconsin Public Service Commission and Wisconsin Legislature, challenging state laws that restrict renewable energy use and promote fossil fuels, violating their constitutional rights to a stable climate and to use and enjoy Wisconsin’s rivers and lakes.
Tobacco retailers sued Washington County to prevent the implementation of its law banning the sale of flavored tobacco products, arguing that state law preempts this local restriction.
Trade groups for home builders and restaurants, as well as a gas utility and two property managers, sued Montgomery County, Maryland arguing that its Building Performance Standard (“BPS”) is preempted by the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (“EPCA”).
Cigar and pipe tobacco trade associations filed suit against the FDA, challenging its decision to deem premium cigars and pipe tobacco subject to the agency’s regulatory authority under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
The U.S. federal government sued two cities in Northern California, Morgan Hill and Petaluma, alleging that local ordinances that restrict natural gas infrastructure and appliances in new construction are preempted by the Energy Policy Conservation Act.
Ohio’s attorney general filed a lawsuit against a tobacco retailer for selling e-cigarettes that were illegal to sell because they did not have authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, arguing that this was an illegal and deceptive act under the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act.
The case casts a spotlight on a troubling pattern of inaction by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration when it comes to addressing the significant public health concerns around menthol cigarettes, but it also highlights what innovative litigation can do to combat this inaction.
A trade association in Colorado, the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM), is challenging a state law that requires disclosures of air-quality impacts of gas stoves.
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act gives the U.S. Food and Drug Administration the authority to require tobacco industry retailers, manufacturers, and distributors to pay civil monetary penalties for violating the Act. A tobacco retailer filed suit against the FDA after being assessed a penalty.
Philip Morris and other plaintiffs sued the U.S. Food and Drug Administration over the agency’s rule requiring graphic warning labels on cigarette packaging and advertising.