TRO Granted in New York Flavour Ban


Information is a little scarce atm but here is a little more info

6 Likes

The VTA statement is revealing :slight_smile:

"At approximately 1:00PM Eastern Standard Time our team confirmed with the New York State Department of Health; that the impending flavor ban has been temporarily suspended. This is due to a recent case filed against New York State through a federal court in Albany.

"People familiar with the case say the federal judge has asked the state to produce evidence that deaths from vaping contaminated and black market THC products are related to flavors, specifically the banning of flavors. "

So finally the issues are separated despite the linguistic twisting and smokescreens by CDC, politicians, and the media.

While I despise Twitter, IMO this is worthwhile: https://twitter.com/ecigattorney

6 Likes

Reading though this and lots of other searching reminds me of a quotation and ruling that ol farts like me want to stand forever against the tyranny of executive power when they take the law into their own hands. There were many issues pertaining to legislative authority or “jurisdiction” raised in the New York court action as well as the absurdity of conflating flavors with contaminated black market THC products. Every one of the governors has acknowledged in one way or another the need to have legislative involvement, but even then I don’t personally believe that that bunk would stand against a proper challenge.

An “appropriate” governmental “determination” must be the result of a process of reasoning. It cannot be an arbitrary fiat contrary to the known facts. This is inherent in the meaning of “determination.” It is implicit in a government of laws and not of men. Where an act of an official plainly falls outside of the scope of his authority, he does not make that act legal by doing it and then invoking the doctrine of administrative construction to cover it.

It is not without significance that most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights are procedural. It is procedure that spells much of the difference between rule by law and rule by whim or caprice. Steadfast adherence to strict procedural safeguards is our main assurance that there will be equal justice under law. . JOINT ANTI-FASCIST REFUGEE COMMITTEE v. MCGRATH, 71 S. Ct. 624, 341 U.S. 123 (U.S. 04/30/1951)

(McGrath was the US atty General)

So it looks encouraging though I am not naive’ enough to believe in the “system,” only the principles, and maybe that knowledge is power. The lawyers appear to me to be doing things very well. :slightly_smiling_face:

5 Likes