"The retailers contend that the birthdate cutoff of January 1, 2000, is arbitrary and thus not rationally related to the town's legitimate interest. We disagree. Line drawing—a legislative necessity—does not, without more, make a law unconstitutional," Associate Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt wrote.
March 12, 2024 at 10:14 AM
4 minute read
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has sided with a town in a lawsuit filed by several retailers over a provision that prohibits the sale of tobacco products to anyone born after Jan. 1, 2000, holding that the local law was not preempted by the state’s Tobacco Act.
Furthermore, the court unanimously agreed that the birthdate classification in Brookline’s law was “rationally related” to a government interest to curb minors’ use of tobacco products.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Truly exceptional Bergen County New Jersey Law Firm is growing and seeks strong plaintiff's personal injury Attorney with 5-7 years plaintif...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
