Arkansas ACT 1235 (SB978) Shuts Down Online Sales

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheLordWinter

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Aug 29, 2010
224
154
Detroit, MI
The bill classifies vapor products as tobacco products thereby inherently prohibits any online retail or direct online B2C sales of any "vapor product, alternative nicotine product or e-liquid product" to occur within the Arkansas state line.
I hope someone challenges it but I feel it's going to take everyone nationwide coming together and funding it.

Commerce Clause Limitations on State Regulation
The Commerce Clause is a grant of power to Congress, not an express limitation on the power of the states to regulate the economy. At least four possible interpretations of the Commerce Clause have been proposed. First, it has been suggested that the Clause gives Congress the exclusive power to regulate commerce. Under this interpretation, states are divested of all power to regulate interstate commerce. Second, it has been suggested that the Clause gives Congress and the states concurrent power to regulate commerce. Under this view, state regulation of commerce is invalid only when it is preempted by federal law. Third, it has been suggested that the Clause assumes that Congress and the states each have their own mutually exclusive zones of regulatory power. Under this interpretation, it becomes the job of the courts to determine whether one sovereign has invaded the exclusive regulatory zone of the other. Finally, it has been suggested that the Clause by its own force divests states of the power to regulate commerce in certain ways, but the states and Congress retain concurrent power to regulate commerce in many other ways. This fourth interpretation, a complicated hybrid of two others, turns out to be the approach taken by the Court in its decisions interpreting the Commerce Clause.

I'm going to confess a degree of ignorance here on the topic, having not read every page in this thread, so if someone has already mentioned this, please forgive or ignore my repetition.

That said, I think the Commerce Clause is inapplicable here, not sure on the legal reasoning but quite a number of states have banned online alcohol sales. I'd think that the Commerce Clause would have been used long ago to open up the online alcohol market more widely if it were applicable to tobacco in this manner. After all, they DID name name it the ATF, lumping those three into a "special" category. That's where all the vexation is coming from in the first place... blasted "sin" taxes and the hysteria surrounding the "sinful" products, and the people who are foaming at the mouth to get rid of them for good. 1984 anyone?
 

Kent C

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 12, 2009
26,547
60,050
NW Ohio US
That said, I think the Commerce Clause is inapplicable here, not sure on the legal reasoning but quite a number of states have banned online alcohol sales. I'd think that the Commerce Clause would have been used long ago to open up the online alcohol market more widely if it were applicable to tobacco in this manner.

It was. Swedenburg v. Kelly. Only some states have found workarounds that also should be challenged, but the Institute for Justice (think a libertarian version of ACLU - except it protects/fights for all rights *, not just speech) won in the Supreme Court the case regarding wine shipping from some states to others.

Here's an article discussing it before the victory:

NY Wine - Background | The Institute for Justice

"The Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution empowers only Congress—and not the states—to regulate the way business is conducted across state lines. The Commerce Clause was designed to prevent states from creating protectionist schemes, yet 24 states, acting at the behest of the politically and financially powerful wholesalers, have erected interstate trade barriers when it comes to the sale of wine. Swedenburg v. Kelly seeks to open up those markets and put an end to this kind of government-imposed discrimination. "

*The Institute for Justice

Institute Profile: The IJ Mission
Through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research, the Institute for Justice advances a rule of law under which individuals can control their destinies as free and responsible members of society. IJ litigates to secure economic liberty, school choice, private property rights, freedom of speech and other vital individual liberties, and to restore constitutional limits on the power of government. In addition, IJ trains law students, lawyers and activists in the tactics of public interest litigation.

Through these activities, IJ challenges the ideology of the welfare state and illustrates and extends the benefits of freedom to those whose full enjoyment of liberty is denied by government.

Someone in Ark. - a vendor or a vendor association - should contact IJ and ask them if they'd be willing to take up the case. As long as it's a case against the gov't, they may very well be interested.
 

bigdancehawk

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 27, 2010
1,462
5,477
Kansas City, Missouri
It was. Swedenburg v. Kelly. Only some states have found workarounds that also should be challenged, but the Institute for Justice (think a libertarian version of ACLU - except it protects/fights for all rights *, not just speech) won in the Supreme Court the case regarding wine shipping from some states to others.

Yeah, the gist of Swedenburg is that, under the Commerce Clause, states may not discriminate against out-of-state wine sellers to favor in-state sellers. This, notwithstanding the argument that 21st Amendment gives the states virtually unlimited power to regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages. There is no 21st Amendment for e-cigarettes. So, could someone please explain how Arkansas can effectively prohibit interstate commerce in e-cigs? Or maybe I don't understand what the statute does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nicnik

skoony

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jul 31, 2013
5,692
9,952
68
saint paul,mn,usa
That said, I think the Commerce Clause is inapplicable here, not sure on the legal reasoning but quite a number of states have banned online alcohol sales.
In this case you are right. All parties in or out of state have to play by the same rules.
Therefore it is not restriction of trade. Its regulating the trade.
Regards
Mike
 
There continues to be confusion on the subject here in Arkansas. Yesterday Provape wouldn't even let me order a replacement spring for the P3 because I am in Arkansas. I quickly fired off some angry emails to my state representatives and to the Arkansas Tobacco Control board. The law, at least the way it is being interpreted by the Arkansas Tobacco Control board, does NOT ban online ordering of hardware in general. Here is an excerpt from the email I received from them: "Hardware, absent material to actually produce vapor (e.g. a filled tank, an impregnated wick, etc.…) is not regulated at all and can be purchased by anyone from anyone, anywhere". The attorney who responded to me actually invited vendors to contact him personally for the correct interpretation. His complete email response is below. I, for one, will continue to hound my representatives here in Arkansas to change the law to allow online ordering of e-juice. Restricting me to juice from a local vape shop is ludicrous.

T. Morrow
Bentonville, Arkansas


ATC20150929.JPG
 
I asked the attorney at the Arkansas ATC, who is refreshingly responsive, courteous and helpful compared to many public servants I have dealt with over the years, some follow up questions about e-juice. Here is an excerpt (his complete reply is below):

"It is unlawful for any vendor, in state or out of state, to make an online sales of e-liquids (with or without nicotine content), pre-filled e-cigarettes, e-cigars and the like, and vapor devices containing a vapor generating substance end consumers in Arkansas.".

The emphasis in this quote is not mine. It is the attorney's. How in the world Arkansas legislators can equate e-liquid that contains no nicotine at all with tobacco and regulate it as such is simply ludicrous. Of course this is just one of many problems with this new law in Arkansas. This law makes ignorant and erroneous equivocations, infringes on inter-state commerce, restricts consumer choices, does nothing to advance public safety, etc.. I, and hopefully many others, will continue to lobby Arkansas legislators to repeal or substantially revise the onerous and ill-advised law. In the meantime I will have to make other arrangements to obtain my favorite e-juices that are not stocked in local vape shops. It also appears that the impact on Arkansas vape shops will be significant as well. At the very least it looks like they will have to obtain a retail sales permit to sell e-juice at all and get a manufacturer's license (I have no idea what requirements for this are) if they want to mix up their own e-juice.

ATC20150929-2.JPG
 

Captain Pegleg

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 14, 2015
413
306
Arkansas
I asked the attorney at the Arkansas ATC, who is refreshingly responsive, courteous and helpful compared to many public servants I have dealt with over the years, some follow up questions about e-juice. Here is an excerpt (his complete reply is below):

"It is unlawful for any vendor, in state or out of state, to make an online sales of e-liquids (with or without nicotine content), pre-filled e-cigarettes, e-cigars and the like, and vapor devices containing a vapor generating substance end consumers in Arkansas.".

The emphasis in this quote is not mine. It is the attorney's. How in the world Arkansas legislators can equate e-liquid that contains no nicotine at all with tobacco and regulate it as such is simply ludicrous. Of course this is just one of many problems with this new law in Arkansas. This law makes ignorant and erroneous equivocations, infringes on inter-state commerce, restricts consumer choices, does nothing to advance public safety, etc.. I, and hopefully many others, will continue to lobby Arkansas legislators to repeal or substantially revise the onerous and ill-advised law. In the meantime I will have to make other arrangements to obtain my favorite e-juices that are not stocked in local vape shops. It also appears that the impact on Arkansas vape shops will be significant as well. At the very least it looks like they will have to obtain a retail sales permit to sell e-juice at all and get a manufacturer's license (I have no idea what requirements for this are) if they want to mix up their own e-juice.

View attachment 494615

Thank you so much for this. I will send it immediately to the website that refused my order...so maybe I won't have to say I'm from Arizona, again >.> *coughcough*
 
  • Like
Reactions: mamabear15

Tomorrow AR

Full Member
May 25, 2015
32
61
Arkansas, USA
Thank you so much for this. I will send it immediately to the website that refused my order...so maybe I won't have to say I'm from Arizona, again >.> *coughcough*
I had a problem on the Provape website. I was able to resolve the issue by contacting them directly. They have removed AR as a valid shipping state on their site as a stopgap meaure but will work directly with individuals to accomodate legit orders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mamabear15

Jrdot

Full Member
Dec 23, 2013
40
27
Arkansas
I recently tried to order some coils for my Subox mini from Mad____s and was told....

Unfortunately, we are unable to send anything to our customers in Texas, Arkansas, North Dakota, Utah, and Indiana due to new laws and regulations set by the states. We apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause. We ask that you have patience with us and our legal team. We will send out a newsletter out as soon as we know when we will be able to send packages out to your state again. If you are not signed up for the newsletter we ask that you sign up on the bottom of the home page. Thank you.
Ticket status has been changed to Waiting for customer

With best regards,
Katie L

I also never saw a "call to action" for Arkansas, though I have participated in a few other states fight against banning/regulation. I am now 2 years smoke free and resent the government interference here. I see no reason for the over reaction to E-Cigs when more accidents are caused by cosmetics! I understand vendors must now acquire a permit to sell certain vaping products here in Arkansas, in addition to the other States mentioned. Hope it doesn't keep spreading. That seems like money is the driving force rather than concern for public health.
 
I recently tried to order some coils for my Subox mini from Mad____s and was told....

Unfortunately, we are unable to send anything to our customers in Texas, Arkansas, North Dakota, Utah, and Indiana due to new laws and regulations set by the states. We apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause. We ask that you have patience with us and our legal team. We will send out a newsletter out as soon as we know when we will be able to send packages out to your state again. If you are not signed up for the newsletter we ask that you sign up on the bottom of the home page. Thank you.
Ticket status has been changed to Waiting for customer

With best regards,
Katie L

I also never saw a "call to action" for Arkansas, though I have participated in a few other states fight against banning/regulation. I am now 2 years smoke free and resent the government interference here. I see no reason for the over reaction to E-Cigs when more accidents are caused by cosmetics! I understand vendors must now acquire a permit to sell certain vaping products here in Arkansas, in addition to the other States mentioned. Hope it doesn't keep spreading. That seems like money is the driving force rather than concern for public health.

See my posts above for info from attorney at Arkansas Tobacco Control. It is legal to send coils to Arkansas. The attorney from ATC said he was willing to contact vendors directly to help them understand the new laws. It is legal to send hardware to Arkansas. I will be lobbying hard during the next legislative session in Arkansas to have the stupid law amended or repealed. It makes it much harder for me to get some of my favorite juices that local B&M shops don't carry.

Good Luck,
Tom
 

Verb

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 26, 2014
1,563
2,114
Eastern, PA, USA
I also tentatively started an order for nictotime base from another website, to see if I'd be a able...I may need to pull the trigger on that soon in case my state's laws remain stringent, and before the site stops selling. :(

Since nic base is not vapable and, more importantly, not marketed as eLiquid it is not covered by the law. The law restricts products under the basis of how they are marketed not what they are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LaraC

g.dampfer

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Sep 27, 2013
99
56
Germany
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread