Limitations regarding the use of quotes
The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld Multnomah County’s law ending the sale of flavored tobacco products, finding that it is not preempted by state law. The lawsuit, initiated by the tobacco industry, challenged the county's authority to enact such a ban, which was set to take effect in 2024. This decision follows a 2024 Court of Appeals ruling upholding a similar law in Washington County. The court's decision affirmed that local health authorities have the legal right to regulate the sale of tobacco products to protect public health.
The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids filed an amicus brief, joined by other leading public health, medical and community groups, in support of the Multnomah County law (see "Related Documents").