Philip Morris Can’t Block New Cigarette Warning Label Requirements, Rules Judge

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Philip Morris Cigarette Warning Label Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: A federal judge denied Philip Morris’ request to block new FDA requirements for warning labelling on cigarette packaging. 
• Why: Philip Morris claimed the new rules are a violation of its first amendment rights in a lawsuit lodged against the US Food and Drug Administration.
• Where: The lawsuit is pending in District of Columbia federal court.

Philip Morris Inc’s request to block a cigarette labeling requirement by the US Food and Drug Administration that it put graphic warning labels on its products was denied by a federal judge. 

US District Judge Florence Y. Pan cited a preliminary injunction having already been put in through Oct. 11 of next year, reports Law360. 

“I just think it’s contrary to the entire point of an emergency injunction,” Judge Pan said.

Pan told the cigarette manufacturer it could bring up the request again at a later date, however. 

Philip Morris Fights Cigarette Labeling Requirements in Lawsuit Against FDA

Philip Morris claimed the FDAs new rule should be put on hold until a federal judge in Texas rules on a similar lawsuit filed by tobacco companies there, reports Law360. 

The cigarette manufacturers filed a complaint against the FDA and the US Department of Health and Human Services in May of last year over the new warning label requirement. 

The new rule, announced in March 2020, requires cigarette companies dedicate 50 percent of the top of their front and back packaging — and 20 percent of the top of advertising — to graphic warning labels, reports Law360. 

Philip Morris claims that the FDA doesn’t have justification for the new rule, which it argues violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the First Amendment. 

“FDA’s marginal interest in more effectively educating consumers about less-known health risks of smoking is insufficient to justify a regime that forces manufacturers to carry messages aimed at pushing away their own customers,” Philip Morris said, reports Law360. 

Both Philip Morris and the government filed for summary judgement following the company’s complaint. 

E-cigarettes have also been under the microscope lately. A class action lawsuit was filed against 7-Eleven earlier this month over allegations it misled consumers about the safety of JUUL devices compared to regular cigarettes. 

Do you agree with the FDA’s new warning label requirements for cigarette products? Let us know in the comments! 

The plaintiffs are represented by Stephen Andrews, Jesse Clay, Richard Cleary Jr., Sarah M. Harris, and Lisa Blatt of Williams & Connolly LLP.

The Philip Morris Cigarette Warning Label Lawsuit is Philip Morris USA Inc. et al. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01181, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Are Juul Pods Safe If You Have a History of Seizures?
• $15M Awarded in Lawsuit Over E-Cig Battery Explosion Injuries
• More Plaintiffs, Including Minors and School Districts, Join Multidistrict Litigation Against Juul
• Federal Circuit Upholds Summary Judgement Clearing HP, Others Of Printing Patent Infringement