An Ohio law prohibiting cities from banning the sale of flavored tobacco products is unconstitutional, a judge has ruled.
The state is expected to appeal Friday’s ruling by Franklin County Common Pleas Court Judge Mark Serrott, who issued a temporary restraining order in April that prevented the law from taking effect. The measure became law in January after the GOP Legislature overrode GOP Gov. Mike DeWine’s veto. budget measure which placed regulatory powers in the hands of the state.
The decision resulted from a lawsuit filed by more than a dozen cities, including Columbus and Cincinnati, and Serrott’s decision means their bans will remain in place. However, this ordinance only applies to these cities and is not a statewide injunction.
Measure, vetoed in 2022 Before appearing again in the state budget, said regulation of tobacco and alternative nicotine products should be the prerogative of the state, not municipalities. It also prevented communities from voting on restrictions on things like flavored e-cigarettes and the sale of flavored vaping products.
Lawmakers passed the 2022 law days after Ohio’s capital, Columbus, lifted bans on the sale of flavored tobacco and menthol tobacco products that were expected to take effect earlier this year.
Tobacco control advocates, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network and DeWine himself sharply criticized the decision as a victory for the tobacco industry, saying it is addictive in children because tobacco and vaping products made with fruit or candy flavors become increasingly popular and accessible to children. Children.
Opponents of the measure argued in part that it violated Ohio’s Home Rule Clause, which allows local governments to create their own ordinances as long as they do not conflict with the state’s Revised Code. Serrott agreed, finding that the law was designed only to prevent cities from governing themselves.
During the repeal vote, Senate President Matt Huffman said lawmakers had carefully reviewed the language with the Legislative Service Commission, a nonpartisan agency that writes bills for the General Assembly, and did not believe it would affect all possible restrictions on tobacco products that might be imposed. local authorities. pass.
Supporters of the measure tout it as a way to keep tobacco laws consistent and eliminate confusion for Ohioans. They argue that the state, not communities, should have control because restrictions on products would affect state revenues as a whole.
DeWine argues that the best way to ensure uniformity in these laws would be to ban flavored tobacco statewide.