Supreme court widens court options for vaping companies pushing back against FDA rules
The 7-2 opinion comes as companies push back against a yearslong federal regulatory crackdown on electronic cigarettes. It's expected to give the companies more control over which judges hear lawsuits filed against the agency.
The justices went the other way on vaping in an April decision, siding with the FDA in a ruling upholding a sweeping block on most sweet-flavored vapes instituted after a spike in youth vaping.
The current case was filed by R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., which had sold a line of popular berry and menthol-flavored vaping products before the agency started regulating the market under the Tobacco Control Act in 2016.
The agency refused to authorize the company's Vuse Alto products, an order that 'sounded the death knell for a significant portion of the e-cigarette market,' Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the majority opinion.
The company is based in North Carolina and typically would have been limited to challenging the FDA in a court there or in the agency's home base of Washington. Instead, it joined forces with Texas businesses that sell the products and sued there. The conservative 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the lawsuit to go forward, finding that anyone whose business is hurt by the FDA decision can sue.
The agency appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that R.J. Reynolds was trying to find a court friendly to its arguments, a practice often called 'judge shopping.'
The justices, though, found that the law does allow other businesses affected by the FDA decisions, like e-cigarette sellers, to sue in their home states.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
In a dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, said she would have sided with the agency and limited where the cases can be filed.
The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids called the majority decision disappointing, saying it would allow manufacturers to 'judge shop,' though it said the companies will still have to contend with the Supreme Court's April decision.
Attorney Ryan Watson, who represented R.J. Reynolds, said that the court recognized that agency decisions can have devastating downstream effects on retailers and other businesses, and the decision 'ensures that the courthouse doors are not closed' to them.
___
Follow the AP's coverage of the Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
25 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Australia to reduce US beef import restrictions denounced by Trump as a ban
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australia will reduce restrictions on U.S. beef imports after U.S. President Donald Trump criticized what he described as an Australian ban on the meat, Agriculture Minister Julie Collins said. Collins said Thursday that relaxing the restrictions designed to keep Australia free of mad cow disease, also known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, among its cattle herds would not compromise biosecurity. 'Australia stands for open and free trade — our cattle industry has significantly benefited from this,' Collins said in a statement. Australia has allowed imports of beef grown in the United States since 2019. But Australia has not allowed imports from the U.S. of beef sourced from Canada or Mexico because of the disease risk. But the U.S. has recently introduced additional movement controls that identify and trace all cattle from Mexico and Canada to their farms of origin. US cattle import controls satisfy Australian authorities Australian authorities were 'satisfied the strengthened control measures put in place by the U.S. effectively manage biosecurity risks,' Collins said. The timing of the new, reduced restrictions has not been finalized. Trump attacked Australian import restrictions on U.S. beef when he announced in April that tariffs of at least 10% would be placed on Australian imports, with steel and aluminum facing a 50% tariff. 'Australia bans — and they're wonderful people, and wonderful everything — but they ban American beef,' Trump told reporters then. 'Yet we imported $3 billion of Australian beef from them just last year alone. They won't take any of our beef. They don't want it because they don't want it to affect their farmers and, you know, I don't blame them, but we're doing the same thing right now,' Trump added. Lawmaker fears appeasing Trump endangers Australian cattle industry Opposition lawmaker David Littleproud suspected the government was endangering Australia's cattle industry to appease Trump. 'I want to see the science and it should be predicated on science. I'm suspicious of the speed at which this has been done,' Littleproud told reporters. 'We need to give confidence to the industry, but also to you (the public): this is not just about animal welfare, this is about human welfare, this is about BSE potentially coming into this country and having a human impact, so I think it's important the government's very transparent about the science and I don't think it's even beyond the question to have an independent panel review that science to give confidence to everybody,' he added. Around 70% of Australian beef is exported. Producers fear that export market would vanish overnight if diseases including mad cow or foot-and-mouth disease infected Australian cattle. Will Evans, chief executive of Cattle Australia who represents more than 52,000 grass-fed beef producers across the nation, said he was confident the agriculture department had taken a cautious approach toward U.S. imports. 'The department's undertaken a technical scientific assessment and we have to put faith in them. They've made this assessment themselves. They've said: 'We've looked at this, we've looked at the best science, this is a decision that we feel comfortable with,'' Evans told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. 'When you have a 75 billion (Australian dollar, $50 billion) industry relying on them not making this mistake, I'm sure they've been very cautious in their decision-making,' he added. US beef prices rise because of drought and a domestic cattle shortage Beef prices have been rising in the U.S. due to factors that include drought and shrinking domestic herd numbers. The average price of a pound of ground beef in the U.S. rose to $6.12 in June, up nearly 12% from a year ago, according to U.S. government data. The average price of all uncooked beef steaks rose 8% to $11.49 per pound. Australia's opposition to any U.S. tariffs will be high on the agenda when Prime Minister Anthony Albanese secures his first face-to-face meeting with Trump. Albanese and Trump were to hold a one-on-one meeting on the sidelines of a Group of Seven summit in Canada last month, but the U.S. president left early. Albanese expects the pair will meet this year, although no date has been announced. The two countries have had a bilateral free trade deal for 20 years and the U.S. has maintained a trade surplus with Australia for decades.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Small Brazilian coffee producers fear for the future after Trump's 50% tariff
PORCIUNCULA, Brazil (AP) — Brazilian José Natal da Silva often tends to his modest coffee plantation in the interior of Rio de Janeiro state in the middle of the night, sacrificing sleep to fend off pests that could inflict harm on his precious crops. But anxiety has troubled his shut-eye even more in recent weeks, following President Donald Trump's announcement earlier this month of a 50% tariff on Brazilian imported goods, which experts expect to drive down the price of coffee in Brazil. Da Silva sighed as he recounted his fears, sitting on the dry earth surrounded by his glossy green arabica coffee shrubs, in the small municipality of Porciuncula. 'We're sad because we struggle so much. We spend years battling to get somewhere. And suddenly, everything starts falling apart, and we're going to lose everything,' da Silva said. 'How are we going to survive?' Tariff linked to Bolsonaro trial Trump's tariff on Brazil is overtly political. In his public letter detailing the reasons for the hike, the U.S. president called the trial of his ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro, a ' witch hunt.' Bolsonaro is accused of masterminding a coup to overturn his 2022 election loss to left-leaning President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The tariff has sparked ripples of fear in Brazil, particularly among sectors with deep ties to the American market such as beef, orange juice — and coffee. Minor coffee producers say the import tax will hit their margins and adds to the uncertainty already generated by an increasingly dry and unpredictable climate. Brazil, the world's largest coffee producer, exports around 85% of its production. The United States is the country's top coffee buyer and represents around 16% of exports, according to Brazil's coffee exporters council Cecafe. The president of Cecafe's deliberative council, Márcio Ferreira, told journalists last week that he thinks the U.S. will continue to import Brazilian coffee, even with the hefty tariff. 'It's obvious that neither the United States nor any other source can give up on Brazil, even if it's tariffed,' he said. Tariff could hurt competitiveness of Brazilian coffee in U.S. But the tariff will likely decrease Brazilian coffee's competitiveness in the U.S. and naturally reduce demand, said Leandro Gilio, a professor of global agribusiness at Insper business school in Sao Paulo. 'There's no way we can quickly redirect our coffee production to other markets,' Gilio said. 'This principally affects small producers, who have less financial power to make investments or support themselves in a period like this.' Family farmers produce more than two-thirds of Brazilian coffee. They are a majority in Rio state's northwestern region, where most of the state's coffee production lies. Coffee farming is the primary economic activity in these municipalities. In Porciuncula, which neighbors Brazil's largest coffee-producing state Minas Gerais, gentle mountains are layered with symmetrical lines of coffee shrubs. Da Silva, who wore a straw hat for protection from the sun and a crucifix around his neck, owns around 40,000 coffee trees. He started working in the fields when he was 12. Besides coffee, he grows cassava, squash, bananas, oranges and lemons and has a few chickens that provide fresh eggs. 'We have them because of the fear of not being able to eat. We wouldn't manage if everything were bought, because the profit is very low,' he said. Last year, drought — made more likely by human-caused climate change — devastated large swathes of da Silva's production. The reduction in supply pushed coffee prices up, but only after many small-scale farmers had already sold all their crops. Since peaking in February, prices of arabica have fallen, dropping 33% by July, according to the University of Sao Paulo's Center for Advanced Studies in Applied Economics, which provides renowned commodity price reports. 'When you make an investment, counting on a certain price for coffee, and then when you go to sell it the price is 20-30% less than you calculated, it breaks the producers,' said Paulo Vitor Menezes Freitas, 31, who also owns a modest plantation of around 35,000 coffee trees in the nearby municipality of Varre-Sai. The demands of coffee farming Life out in the fields is tough, according to Menezes Freitas. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. During harvest season, he sometimes gets up at 3 a.m. to turn on a coffee drier, going to bed as late as midnight. The rest of the year is less intense, but still, there are few to no breaks because there's always work to do, he said. Menezes Freitas, who is expecting his first child in October, said the tariff's announcement increased his fears for the future. 'It's scary. It feels like you're on shaky ground. If things get worse, what will we do? People will start pulling out their coffee and finding other ways to survive because they won't have the means to continue,' he said. In addition to slashing the value of his coffee beans, Menezes Freitas said the tariff will impact machinery and aluminum — goods that producers like him use every day. 'We hope this calms down. Hopefully, they'll come to their senses and remove that tariff. I think it would be better for both the United States and Brazil,' he said.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Texas AG claimed three homes as primary residence. Democrats are being probed for similar issue
WASHINGTON (AP) — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his wife, Angela, are longtime owners of a $1.5 million house in a gated community outside Dallas. In 2015, they snapped up a second home in Austin. Then another. The problem: Mortgages signed by the Paxtons contained inaccurate statements declaring that each of those three houses was their primary residence, enabling the now-estranged couple to improperly lock in low interest rates, according to an Associated Press review. The lower rates will save the Paxtons tens of thousands of dollars in payments over the life of the loan, legal experts say. The records also revealed that the Paxtons collected an impermissible homestead tax break on two of those homes, and they have routinely flouted lending agreements on some of their other properties. It is a federal and state crime to knowingly make false statements on mortgage documents. It's also against the law in Texas to collect a homestead tax break on two separate properties. Violating the terms of a mortgage could allow lenders recourse to seek full payment of a loan, according to legal experts. Mortgages have become political fodder The mortgage revelations are likely to become fodder in the Republican primary for a U.S. Senate seat in which Paxton is seeking to topple the incumbent, John Cornyn. The situation is further complicated by the Trump administration's criminal pursuit of Democrats over similar issues. President Donald Trump has accused two of his political foes — Sen. Adam Schiff of California and New York Attorney General Letitia James — of committing mortgage fraud, though legal experts say the circumstances are less serious. The Democrats have long been objects of Trump's ire for having led various investigations into his conduct as president and as a business executive. Paxton, himself, has weighed in on the investigation of James, saying he hoped authorities would look into her conduct. 'I hope that if she's done something wrong, I hope that she's actually held accountable,' he told supporters last month. The Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation of James, FBI director Kash Patel told Fox News in May. The department received a criminal referral for Schiff last week from the Federal Housing Finance Agency, its director William Pulte confirmed in a social media post. Neither the Justice Department nor the FHFA responded to an inquiry about whether they may investigate Paxton, too. James' attorney, Abbe Lowell, urged the Trump administration to investigate Paxton instead. 'If this administration was genuinely interested in rooting out fraud, it appears they should stop wasting their time on the baseless and discredited allegations against the New York Attorney General James and turn their attention to Texas,' said Lowell, a prominent Washington attorney whose past clients include Hunter Biden, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner. In a statement, Marisol Samayoa, a Schiff spokeswoman, blasted the criminal referral as 'a transparent attempt' by Trump 'to punish a perceived political foe who is committed to holding him to account.' She added that Schiff disclosed to his lenders that he owned another home that was a principal residence and sought guidance from an attorney. It is unlikely that Paxton, a staunch Trump ally, will face the same federal scrutiny as James and Schiff. It's equally doubtful that Paxton will face much legal trouble in Texas: His office is one of the primary agencies tasked with investigating allegations of mortgage fraud. Ken Paxton and his spokesman did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Angela Paxton, who is a state senator in Texas, did not respond to requests made through her office. Three of the Paxtons' homes are each listed as a primary residence Documents reviewed by the AP show the Paxtons hold mortgages on three homes — one in suburban Dallas, two in Austin — that are each listed as their primary residence. The designation comes with a considerable financial upside. Interest rates on primary homes are significantly lower than those for mortgages on secondary homes or investment properties, saving buyers tens of thousands of dollars — if not more — over the life of a loan. Making a case against Paxton would require 'establishing both that Paxton was aware of the contents of the mortgage document, and also that he was actively aware at the time that he signed it that this was not going to be a primary residence,' said Jennifer E. Laurin, a professor at the University of Texas Law School in Austin. Legal experts say it is possible that the Paxtons' lenders prepared the documents and that the couple did not carefully review them before signing. Even if that were the case, some legal experts say that Paxton, as an attorney and Texas' top law enforcement officer, ought to have known better. 'If he filled out lender documents knowing that they were false, then that is a false statement to obtain a mortgage on favorable terms. That would be actionable,' said Arif Lawji, a veteran Texas real estate attorney. 'He's the chief enforcement officer. You have to be accountable for stuff you do that's wrong.' Paxton collected two 'homestead' tax breaks Low interest rates are not the only perk the Paxtons secured, records show. In 2018, they simultaneously collected homestead property tax breaks on their family's home in suburban Dallas, as well as on a $1.1 million home in Austin, property records and tax statements show. A homestead tax break is a property tax reduction that a homeowner is only eligible to collect on one property that is also their primary home. The suburban Dallas home is where the Paxtons' family has long resided. It's where Ken and Angela Paxton are registered to vote. It is located in the state Senate district that Angela Paxton represents in the Legislature, which Ken Paxton held before his election in 2014 to be attorney general. It's also where Ken Paxton's Senate campaign website until recently said he lived. Lawji said the Paxtons' simultaneous collection of two homestead tax breaks appears to be a more clearcut violation. That is because one must obtain a form and submit it to taxing authorities to receive such a tax break, making it an 'intentional act,' he said. The tax break was worth several thousand dollars, a fact that confounded real estate lawyers. 'Why would you try to do all of this,' Lawji said, 'when you are the attorney general? That's a bigger question to me than the money, when you are AG and have to enforce this law.' Paxton may have violated mortgage terms by renting properties Separately, land records indicate the Paxtons may have violated the terms of at least two mortgages on other houses they own. The mortgage on a home in College Station, Texas, says the property is for the Paxtons' exclusive use and cannot be rented out. Doing so would be grounds for terminating the mortgage, the document states. The home has been listed for rent on real estate websites on-and-off since at least 2022. Ken Paxton also holds a $1.2 million mortgage on a '5 bedroom luxury cabin' in Broken Bow, Oklahoma, that is for rent on Airbnb and other short-term rental sites, records show. The property's mortgage stipulates that it cannot be rented out. Representatives for Stifel Bank, Cornerstone Home Lending and Benchmark Mortgage, which issued the mortgages in question, did not respond to requests for comment. Schiff and James come under fire from GOP Paxton's real estate dealings are in many ways distinct from those of James and Schiff, the Democrats targeted by the Trump administration. The investigation of James centers on forms she signed in 2023 while helping a niece buy a home in Virginia. One form stated that James intended to occupy the home as her 'principal residence.' But in other documents, the New York attorney general made clear she had no intention of living there. An email to the mortgage loan broker two weeks before she signed the documents stated the property 'WILL NOT be my primary residence.' 'As I've said from the beginning, if prosecutors want to know that truth about Attorney General James' mortgage applications, we are ready and waiting with the facts,' said Lowell, James' attorney. For over a decade, Schiff owned homes in Maryland and California, the state he represents, that were both designated as his primary residence. In 2020, then a congressman, Schiff designated his Maryland property as a second home — a step Paxton has not taken. Paxton has faced legal and political challenges Paxton's real estate dealings are not the first time he has drawn scrutiny for his conduct while in office. Before his election as attorney general, Paxton, then a state senator, admitted in 2014 to violating Texas securities law and paid a fine. He spent roughly 10 years under state indictment on securities charges while serving as attorney general. The charges were eventually dropped in 2024. Other alleged misdeeds in office led to his impeachment by Texas' GOP-controlled House in 2023. He was acquitted in a trial by the Senate. Angela Paxton did not cast a vote in his impeachment trial and recently filed for divorce, citing Ken Paxton's infidelity and other 'recent discoveries.' She did not elaborate. What ultimately unleashed the impeachment push was Paxton's relationship with Austin real estate developer Nate Paul, who pleaded guilty this year to one count of making a false statement to a financial institution. In 2020, eight top aides in Paxton's office told the FBI they were concerned the state's top law enforcement official was misusing his office to help Paul over the developer's unproven claims about an elaborate conspiracy to steal $200 million of his properties. The House impeachment managers accused Paxton of attempting to interfere in foreclosure lawsuits and issuing legal opinions to benefit Paul. They also alleged that Paul employed a woman with whom Paxton had an affair in exchange for legal help and that the developer paid for expensive renovations to the attorney general's home in Austin. That would be the same house that he declared in mortgage documents was his third primary residence.
