Cart 0

Historical lawsuit slams FDA e-cig regulations with 8 violations

Posted by Matt Rowland on

On June 20, 2016, eleven advocacy groups for users of electronic cigarettes and vaping devices united to file a single lawsuit over the recently announced FDA e-cig regulations.  The case was filed in the District Court of Washington, D.C. and lists eight possible points of contention that the plaintiffs believe are either unconstitutional or downright illegal.  While this is not the first lawsuit of its kind, it appears to be one of the most promising, according to many industry insiders.

Issue #1:  The Predicate Date

The lawsuit questions the legality of the February 15, 2007 predicate date for the Pre-Market Tobacco Applications process (PMTA).  By back-dating this predicate date, nearly 100% of the entire vaping industry’s products would fall victim to the million-dollar and time-consuming approval process within the next two years.  The lawsuit suggests moving the predicate date forward to the date that the FDA e-cig regulations take effect.


Issue #2:  The PMTA Process

Under the U.S. Administrative Procedures Act, the PMTA process is reserved to only “tobacco products.” Since vaping devices and e-cigs are 100% tobacco-free, the lawsuit claims that the FDA does not have the legal authority to require manufacturers of the vaping industry to adhere to a federal approval process that is typically only reserved for Big Tobacco.  With an estimated price tag of $1 million per product, the PMTA process will essentially wipe out the entire industry. The plaintiffs propose an alternative – the submission of a Substantial Equivalence (SE) Report.


Issue #3:  Unconstitutional

The U.S. Tobacco Control Act, of which the FDA regulations are partially based, makes it very clear that different products present different health risks.  But the legislation does not provide clear instructions for how to regulate new products that center the marketplace that are significantly safer than traditional tobacco products, like e-cigs, for example.  Therefore, the entire U.S. Tobacco Control Act is unconstitutional, and the FDA e-cig regulations should be nullified.

Issue #4:  Ban on Free Samples

A ban on free samples essentially violates the U.S. Administrative Procedures Act and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Issue #5:  Smoke vs. Vapor

Under the U.S. Administrative Procedures Act, there is a special provision called The Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP) which discusses the different levels of health risks associated with tobacco products.  This provision seems to focus largely on the harmful substances found in tobacco smoke.  But vaping devices and e-cigs do not contain tobacco and do not produce “smoke.”  Therefore, the U.S. Administrative Procedures Act, does not apply to the vaping industry, and the new FDA e-cig regulations should be nullified.


Issue #6: “Tobacco Product” Classification

By following the chain of issues outlined so far, the plaintiffs take the time to clearly point out with laser-like focus that e-cigs and vaping devices are 100% tobacco-free.  Based on this single point of contention alone, the plaintiffs claim that the FDA e-cig regulations do not apply. 

Issue #7:  Impacts to Small Business

Under the U.S. Regulatory Flexibility Act, all federal agencies must take into consideration the possible effects that their regulatory actions have on small businesses.  The predicate date comes into play again, because nearly 100% of today’s e-cigs and vaping devices were placed on the market after the predicate date of February 15, 2007.  As a result, all retailers would be required to obtain FDA approval through the PMTA process, which most business owners cannot afford.  This is also one of the main issues that Sen. Ron Johnson is questioning by sending those letters to the FDA in the recent past.


Issue #8:  Wiping out the E-cig and Vaping Industry

According to the U.S. Tobacco Control Act, the FDA is required to consider the costs and benefits of their legislative actions.  And under the U.S. Regulatory Flexibility Act, the FDA failed to consider other regulatory alternatives to the PMTA process that would be less costly and perhaps less time-consuming for small business owners.  The lawsuit alleges that the FDA essentially went for a one-size-fits-all solution, grabbing the already written regulations for Big Tobacco, and slapping them onto the vaping industry without a second thought. 

Moving Forward

Of course, the legal language used in the court documents filed for the eleven plaintiffs is much more elaborate than the above breakdown of eight different points.  But for members of the vaping community who are only now hearing about the potentially devastating FDA e-cig regulations, this latest lawsuit seems to hit nearly every major argument that threatens the very existence of the vaping industry.

Vape shop owners love what they do, and they also want to keep selling their products and e-liquids to millions of happy customers.  However, if the FDA e-cig regulations are not overturned, consumers may see thousands of their favorite e-juice flavors, vape mods, and even wicks and batteries disappear almost overnight.  These eleven advocacy groups are fighting for the rights of all vapers and e-cig users in America.



Special Edit from Matt:  I corrected a slight error in the wording of point #7 based on readers' comments.  Thanks so much for pointing this out.  The last thing that we want to do is confuse the vaping community even further.  Fighting the FDA Deeming Regulations is a very important issue that needs everyone's support.  I apologize for the error.  And thanks again! 

Share this post

← Older Post Newer Post →


  • The problem with Big Tobacco is that their sales are down and their profits are down and have been in a steady decline. Part of this is because people, in general, have quit smoking or don’t smoke from 10-20+ years ago. The other part is because of vaping. Because sales and profits are down, they have to do whatever they can to keep the company making a profit…like any business. A bit underhanded, in my opinion, as they would rather sell a product that kills and puts out so many dangerous chemicals than give us healthier options. I think they feel left out by the vaping “revolution” since they don’t have a good product of their own (or even think of vaping themselves) so they’d rather spend millions of dollars putting down vaping rather than spending that on making a great product.

    I know this may go against the grain but personally, I don’t mind the FDA having some regulating authority in the area of the ingredients of eJuice or the products, to make them safer for us all. The last thing I want to do is to vape an eJuice that causes more harm than good or have a mod that blows up in my face. Please note that I am NOT saying that the existing eJuice and products are not good or safe. They are, which is why I’d rather use the existing products than vape on the garbage that they currently put out. In order to do this, they have to find fault and get Big Brother involved to help their cause. That and the fact that, like most Big Businesses despite what they say, would love to have Small Businesses fail so they can swoop in get all the revenue.

    Just focusing on the tasting by consumers, this, i think, is vital for us to be able to make sure we buy what we like. Taste is very subjective. What you taste and prefer could easily be something that I may not like. Because it is so subjective, we should be able to try before we buy if we buy locally. Generally, we test drive a car at a local dealership so why can’t we “test drive” our eJuice at a local B&M? I do not see the difference (other than the fact that the FDA, specifically, does not monitor vehicle safety).

    D Reed on
  • Howdy! Someone in my Facebook group shared this website with us so I came to take
    a look. I’m definitely enjoying the information. I’m book-marking and will
    be tweeting this to my followers! Outstanding blog and fantastic design.

    Kill on
  • I smoked from around the age of 10 or 11, up until about December of 2014, when my sister introduced me to vaping. Now I’ll be honest I didn’t quit cigarettes right away. It wasn’t until about May or June of 2015. Now with that being said, I’m 46 years old now and vaping has saved my life because my cholesterol and blood pressure were through the roof. But since vaping, now for over a year, my blood pressure and cholesterol have gotten into desirable levels.
    Now on somewhat related news, when you go outside on a foggy day, well you’re breathing in a vapor of sorts.

    Edgar Rumrill on
  • I smoked for probably 25 years! I’m an amputee and I had vaped off and on since having a mild heart attack in November of 2013. I was doing quite well with vaping until our son committed suicide in March of 2014. Picked up smoking steadily I might add. Finally about a year and a half ago, my wife said she wasn’t buying anymore cigarettes , and she didn’t! I had this expensive vaping equipment sitting in a box, she said I was gonna use it. Well, I haven’t touched nor have I wanted to touch another cigarette since! I will say vaping actually saved my life but with a strong push from my wonderful wife! I breathe much better. I don’t cough my head off every morning before I can even move! No wheezing or congestion and I vape A LOT! So, these so-called regulations are totally unfounded and extremely unconstitutional! Let’s stand TOGETHER to help overturn the FDA’s “deeming regulations”! #vapestrong #vapelivesmatter #Maskernation #MaskerVape

    Scott Hanley on
  • I smoked for 30 years. I tried an e-cig which was the throw away one. I quit smoking. I tried everything to quit and failed. But after i tried the e-cig on October 21,2013. I have not smoked a cigarette since. Which is really good for me cause i have alot of medical problems. I was diagnosed with COPD when i smoked. I recently seen a lung dr and he said i never had it.

    Samantha on

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published.