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.
This case involves a challenge to a Massachusetts statute requiring manufacturers of cigarettes to provide the Commonwealth's Department of Health (DOH) specific information regarding ingredients and nicotine yield ratings of their cigarettes. The Plaintiff cigarette companies sued, arguing that the law was unconstitutional based upon the principle of preemption, arguing that any regulation requiring the reporting of tobacco ingredients was preempted by the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA). The Court held that the FCLAA did not preempt the Massachusetts state statute, and that the Massachusetts statute was in harmony with the FCLAA.