In a per curiam viewpoint, the Eighth Circuit verified a district court choice supporting a Minnesota residential area’s regulation prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco items. Tobacco business R.J. Reynolds took legal action against the City of Edina after the city passed the regulation in 2020, arguing that the federal Household Smoking cigarettes Avoidance and Tobacco Control Act preempted the city law. The Eighth Circuit just recently declined Reynolds’s reveal preemption claims– under not just one reasoning, however 2 alternative theories– and quickly neglected the appellant’s indicated preemption arguments, as described in R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Business v. City of Edina, 60 F. fourth 1170 (8th Cir. 2023).
In 2020, Edina passed Regulation No. 2020-08, which offers “[n] o individual will offer, sell, or otherwise disperse any flavored tobacco items.” Edina, Minn. Code of Ordinances Â§ 12-257. Flavored tobacco items consist of “any tobacco, tobacco-related item, or tobacco-related gadget which contains a taste or odor, besides the taste or odor of tobacco, that is appreciable by a common customer either prior to or throughout intake or usage of the item or gadget.” Id. Â§ 12-189. After the Regulation passed, Reynolds demanded declaratory and injunctive relief, arguing that federal law specifically and indicated preempted it.