Pennsylvania has asked a federal judge to uphold its new vaping-product directory law, arguing that retailers challenging the statute cannot show it violates the Constitution or intrudes on federal tobacco regulation.
The filing is the latest step in MMA Group 1 Inc. v. Sunday, a lawsuit filed May 20 by companies operating dozens of Tobacco Hut stores, distributor 101 Distributors LLC, and related businesses. The defendants are Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday and Revenue Secretary Patrick Browne.
The plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge Julia K. Munley to block Act 57 of 2025. They argue the law unlawfully turns the state into an enforcer of the Food and Drug Administration’s premarket tobacco application (PMTA) system and discriminates among manufacturers and products.
Pennsylvania says the law simply controls which products may be sold within the state—a power Congress preserved for states when it created federal tobacco regulation. The commonwealth also points to federal appellate decisions rejecting preemption and constitutional challenges to similar state and local restrictions.
That argument received timely support on July 30, when the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld North Carolina’s similar vape directory law. The court ruled 2-1 that North Carolina was regulating sales, not improperly enforcing federal law. Pennsylvania participated in that case as one of 28 states supporting North Carolina.
Act 57 requires manufacturers of nicotine-containing electronic cigarettes sold in Pennsylvania to obtain state certification. The attorney general must maintain a public directory listing approved manufacturers, product names, categories, and flavors. Products excluded from the directory can eventually be seized.
The law is not technically a flavor ban, despite early coverage describing it as a restriction on flavored products. Its practical effect may be similar because eligibility depends heavily on federal authorization or qualifying PMTA status, and the FDA has authorized few products in flavors other than tobacco or menthol.
According to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue’s Act 57 guidance, retailers must also buy tobacco products from licensed wholesalers. Products obtained outside that system are subject to seizure.
Munley converted the plaintiffs’ preliminary-injunction request into a motion for summary judgment in June. Both sides filed additional briefs July 30. Opposition briefs are due Aug. 21, followed by replies Aug. 28.
The case will determine whether Pennsylvania can replace the FDA’s selective, often chaotic enforcement system with a state sales list, or whether doing so crosses the line from regulating commerce into enforcing federal law.
Because of declining cigarette sales, state governments in the U.S. and countries around the world are looking to vapor products as a new source of tax revenue.
A list of vaping product flavor bans and online sales bans in the United States, and sales and possession bans in other countries.
A closer look at PouchPoint, an online nicotine pouch store offering competitive pricing, wide selection, and a smooth shopping experience.
A practical, data-driven breakdown of where the vape market is heading—and how to position your business ahead of regulatory and category shifts.
