WASHINGTON (AP) — A majority of Supreme Court justices didn't seem convinced Monday that federal regulators misled companies as they refused to allow them to sell sweet flavored vaping products following a surge in teen e-cigarette use.
The court did raise questions about Food and Drug Administration crackdown that included denials of more than a million nicotine products formulated to taste like fruit, desert or candy. Teen vaping use has since dropped to a decade low, but the agency could change its approach after the inauguration next month of President-elect Donald Trump, who has promised to "save" vaping.
Vape companies said the FDA changed its standards with little warning and disregarded their plans to sell only to adults as the agency refusal to allow the sale of more than a million new vape products.
Justice Elena Kagan, though, was skeptical.
"I guess I'm not really seeing what the surprise is here," she said. "You knew what the FDA's point of view was ... that blueberry vapes are really problematic in terms of youth smoking."
The FDA was slow to regulate the now multibillion-dollar vaping market, and even years into the crackdown flavored vapes that are technically illegal nevertheless remain widely available.
The agency says the vaping companies were denied because they couldn't show flavored vapes had a net public benefit, as laid out in the law. It has approved some tobacco-flavored vapes, and recently allowed its first menthol-flavored electronic cigarettes for adult smokers.
The issue came before the high court when the agency appealed a decision from the conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeals tossing out one of its denials.
While other lower courts rebuffed vaping company lawsuits, the 5th Circuit sided with Dallas-based company Triton Distribution. The decision allowed the sale of e-juices like "Jimmy The Juice Man in Peachy Strawberry," and "Mother's Milk and Cookies" which are heated by an e-cigarette to create an inhalable aerosol.
Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned whether the FDA process had given the companies a fair chance to make their claims, given that their businesses were at stake.
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh also expressed concern about what recourse companies have if agencies issue misleading guidance, though he also elicited that the FDA wasn't required to issue the guidance it gave in the vaping case. "I'm trying to figure out what the legal error is here," he said.
The conservative-majority court has overall been skeptical of the power of federal regulators, including by striking down the so-called Chevron doctrine that had judges deferring to agencies' interpretation of the law.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned whether the vaping companies wanted the court to take that concept a step further. "It's almost a reverse Chevron deference, except we're deferring to the applicant," she said.
The court is expected to decide the case in the coming months.