On February 3, the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) issued two public health and safety advisories regarding potentially contaminated marijuana products sold by two separate licensees in Massachusetts.

Reviewing, analyzing, and navigating compliance, enforcement, investigation, and litigation developments and trends in the state and federal regulatory landscape
On February 3, the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) issued two public health and safety advisories regarding potentially contaminated marijuana products sold by two separate licensees in Massachusetts.
On March 11, New Jersey Attorney General (AG) Matthew Platkin and the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights (DCR) announced that DCR issued a finding of probable cause against Advance Funding Partners/Same Day Funding (Advance Funding), a company that provides cash advances and consumer loans, alleging that it violated the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination by discriminating against both consumers and employees.
The Virginia General Assembly has once again advanced legislation to establish a regulated market for recreational marijuana sales. Virginia is unique in that it allows personal possession of cannabis but bans retail sales outside of medical marijuana dispensaries. The legislation, HB 2485 sponsored by Delegate Paul Krizek, D-Fairfax County, and SB970 by Senator Aaron Rouse, D-Virginia Beach, passed the Democratic-controlled legislature on a party-line vote (53-46 in the House and 21-19 in the Senate). The bills now move on to Virginia’s Governor Glenn Youngkin.
Last year, we wrote about the former Missouri governor’s efforts to curb the availability of intoxicating hemp products to Missouri consumers by executive order. There are now several proposed bills in the Missouri legislature that seek to regulate hemp-derived consumable products in the state, a few of which we summarize below. In general, the proposed legislation addresses issues related to youth access, licensing, taxation, advertising and marketing, testing, and labeling. This type of proposed legislation is worth monitoring in Missouri, and other states, as states take more aggressive action to prohibit or regulate the availability of such products to consumers in the absence of a coherent, federal regulatory framework.
On December 17, 2024, Iowans for Alternatives to Smoking & Tobacco, Inc., Global Source Distribution, LLC, and others filed a complaint[1] and motion for a preliminary injunction[2] in federal district court against the Iowa Department of Revenue (the Department) challenging Iowa House File 2677 (HF 2677), a law imposing certification and directory requirements on vapor products sold in Iowa. A hearing on the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is scheduled for March 5. If the court rules in the plaintiffs’ favor, it could stay enforcement of the new law until the case is ultimately resolved. While the Department was previously scheduled to publish the vapor products directory on January 2 and begin enforcement on February 3, the Department has not published the directory, and its website indicates that it will not be enforcing the directory. The Department’s website states: “Publication and enforcement of Iowa’s vapor products directory is delayed until further notice. The Department will make an additional announcement before publication and enforcement of the vapor products directory begins. During the delay, manufacturers should continue to submit certification applications.”
On November 21, the Supreme Court of Virginia entered a published order reversing a 14-3 en banc decision of the Court of Appeals of Virginia addressing the applicability of Virginia’s criminal laws regulating cybercrime. The decision in Commonwealth v. Wallace is the latest example of courts testing regulatory reach in the cybercrime arena.
Recently, Attorney General (AG) Matthew J. Platkin announced, in a joint press release with the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board (SACB), the adoption of a new sports betting policy related to combative sports. The policy aims to eliminate certain betting practices perceived as unethical and reinforce public trust in combative sports such as boxing, wrestling, and other related events.More than half of the states in the U.S. offer some form of legal sports betting. The proliferation of sports betting laws followed a 2018 Supreme Court decision striking down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), which imposed a federal ban on sports betting. The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling allowed states legalize sports betting within their borders if they so desired. New Jersey was one of the first states to adopt its own comprehensive sports wagering law after the 2018 decision.The new policy follows recent concerns over the integrity of high-profile combative sports events. Most recently, the global phenomenon of Jake Paul’s defeat of Mike Tyson in an adjusted-rules boxing match raised questions about the fight’s integrity. Amid these concerns, Paul’s Most Valuable Promotions issued a statement refuting claims of match rigging, and asserting that the bout was a professional match sanctioned by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations (TDLR).
In October, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that a law restricting the packaging of e-cigarettes violates the state constitution’s free speech protections. The decision illustrates the utility of free speech arguments against packaging requirements and the importance of state constitutions in regulatory challenges generally.
Last month, California Attorney General (AG) Rob Bonta announced the awardees for the 2024-2025 Tobacco Grant Program, a program spearheaded by the California Department of Justice (DOJ) that aims to support local law enforcement agencies in their efforts to reduce illegal tobacco sales and usage, particularly among minors. Bonta also provided an update on “Operation Up in Smoke,” a comprehensive law enforcement operation targeting illegal tobacco sales. These updates illustrate that California continues to prioritize coordinated law enforcement efforts against businesses that make illegal tobacco sales, particularly to minors.
A consumer class action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against EVO Brands, LLC and PVG2, LLC, both doing business as Puff Bar. The lawsuit alleges that Puff Bar violated state consumer protection laws by engaging in deceptive marketing practices aimed at youth, and by misleading consumers about the legality and safety of their synthetic nicotine e-cigarettes.
In addition to cookies that are necessary for website operation, this website uses cookies and other tracking tools for various purposes, including to provide enhanced functionality and measure website performance. To learn more about our information practices, please visit our Global Privacy Notice.