AG Coleman announces court dismissed vape law challenge
HENDERSON, Ky. (WEHT) – Attorney General Russell Coleman announced after a months-long court battle, the challengers to Kentucky's vaping law voluntarily dismissed their federal lawsuit before the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Sixth Circuit.
AG Coleman says the dismissal effectively ends the challenge to Kentucky House Bill 11 from 2024, which established new guidelines and enforcement relating to vapor products. According to the bill's language, manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers can sell only 'authorized' vapor products. In addition, retailers cannot sell even 'authorized' vapor products to those under the age of 21.
AG Coleman defends law requiring sex offenders to use their full name on social media
Officials say after a Kentucky federal district court dismissed the plaintiffs' challenge to the vaping law, they appealed to the Sixth Circuit in February. The Attorney General opposed the plaintiffs' request, in part because the plaintiffs sued to continue selling products that are illegal under federal law. The Sixth Circuit unanimously agreed with the Attorney General.
Indiana AG says OnStar, GM sold customers' driving data without consent; led to higher insurance rates
'Kentucky's General Assembly is entrusted with the responsibility to make laws, including to promote the health and safety of our families. Our Office will continue to fight to uphold those laws in court and deliver more positive outcomes like this,' said Attorney General Coleman.
The vaping legislation was passed by the General Assembly in April 2024 and took effect January 1, 2025.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
While Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker scored wins during legislative session, cellphone ban, other initiatives fell short
CHICAGO — Entering a legislative session amid questions about whether he'd run for a third term, Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker outlined an ambitious agenda that ended with mixed results. In a State of the State and budget address in February that will be remembered mainly for Pritzker invoking Nazi Germany to describe the new presidential administration, there was also a litany of policy initiatives — some of which passed and will now have a tangible impact on Illinoisans and others that went nowhere in the spring legislative session that just wrapped up. 'You don't get everything done in one year. I think the Senate president can back me up on that, and lots of people in the General Assembly,' Pritzker said Sunday at his end-of-session news conference in Springfield, flanked by Senate President Don Harmon of Oak Park. 'Sometimes they spend two years, four years, six years trying to get something big done. I think we've been hyper-successful about getting things done in a shorter period of time than expected.' But Pritzker's mixed scorecard also revealed tensions between his agenda and those in the Legislative Black Caucus. More than once, Black caucus members balked at Pritzker's plans as they didn't see their wants and needs fully addressed during a legislative session that focused heavily on fiscal issues and a tight budget. Indeed, while the governor's backing puts political capital behind any policy proposal, that didn't mean it was guaranteed to pass through the sometimes splintered Democratic supermajorities in the state House and Senate. Here are some examples of where the governor accomplished what he set out to do — and a few places where he came up short. What Pritzker said: 'This session, I'll move forward with legislation requiring all school districts in Illinois to adopt a cellphone policy that bans the use of phones during classroom instruction. More focus on learning will bring even greater success for kids across our state.' Status: Did not pass. A coalition of Illinois House lawmakers blocked the measure when it came to the House late in the session over concerns about unequal disciplinary impacts, according to bill sponsor, Democratic state Rep. Michelle Mussman of Schaumburg. Concerns about enforcement disproportionately affecting Black and brown students became more pronounced as lawmakers reviewed the phone restriction alongside another bill limiting police from ticketing students for minor misbehavior, according to Mussman. Legislators were hesitant to pass a statewide school mandate while also debating a measure meant to scale back school discipline practices, she said. Rep. Curtis Tarver, a Chicago Democrat and a member of the Black caucus, told the Tribune in February he worried about the 'unintended consequences' of a phone ban, including inequitable enforcement. The legislation against ticketing and fines passed both chambers and now heads to Pritzker's desk for his signature. A Chicago Tribune and ProPublica investigation found school districts used local law enforcement to fine students, and Black students were twice as likely to be ticketed at school as their white peers, a pattern lawmakers aimed to end. Pritzker's cellphone policy will have to wait for another session when there's more time to work out the enforcement aspect, Mussman said. The measure would have required school districts to adopt guidelines prohibiting students from using wireless devices, such as cellphones and smartwatches, during instructional time, while providing secure and accessible storage for the devices, before the 2026-2027 school year. The legislation also included a few exceptions, such as permitting students to use phones in emergencies. In the end, negotiations around the measure came down to a 'dance' between ensuring local school boards had control over their own policies while also protecting students from 'inequitably applied' policies, Mussman said. Moreover, representatives were unsure how to implement guidance on 'how a phone might be returned if it was confiscated, or what to do if anything was lost or broken,' she added. Also not quite making the mark: Pritzker's push to expand so-called evidence-based funding for K-12 schools by $350 million. The final plan would boost funding by $307 million, cutting $43 million that usually would go to a grant program designed to help school districts with high property tax rates and low real estate values. What Pritzker said: 'I'm proposing that we allow community colleges to offer four-year baccalaureate degrees for in-demand career paths — like nursing, advanced manufacturing, early childhood education, and beyond.' And: 'I propose we pass the Public University Direct Admission Program Act introduced by Majority Leader Kimberly Lightford last year. It would allow students to know before they apply whether they qualify for admission to any or all of our state's public universities.' Status: One for two. The Pritzker-led initiative to let community colleges offer four-year degrees didn't make it to the finish line even after the sponsor, Democratic Rep. Tracy Katz Muhl of Northbrook, filed a significant amendment following months of negotiations. The bill was intended to create more paths for students to get affordable, accessible bachelor's degrees in areas that need more workers. However, it initially faced opposition from existing four-year schools that warned it could duplicate degree offerings. Toward the end of the session, Tarver told a Senate committee that the Black caucus had 'significant issues with the bill,' including how it would affect four-year institutions serving a high proportion of Black and minority students, such as Chicago State University. A proposal on direct university admissions, however, passed, meaning high school students and eligible community college students starting in the 2027-2028 school year will automatically be offered admission to public universities if they meet specific GPA standards. What Pritzker said: 'We're going to stop insurance companies from blocking access to mental health. We can do that by banning prior authorization for all behavioral health care. And for rural Illinois families and those who live far away from certain medical care, we'll require insurance reimbursement for reasonable travel costs associated with medical appointments' for some distances. Status: Passed. Building on sweeping health care legislation last year, the General Assembly this session voted on a bill to expand a ban on prior authorization for outpatient behavioral health care, meaning patients will no longer need permission from insurance companies before receiving mental health treatment in many more cases. The same legislation also puts insurers on the hook for travel costs in some instances where closer options aren't adequate. What Pritzker said: 'I'm introducing the Prescription Drug Affordability Act to rein in the unfair practices of PBMs.' Status: Passed. Critics often blame large so-called pharmacy benefit managers, such as CVS Caremark and UnitedHealth Group-owned Optum Rx, for inflating prescription drug costs while pushing independent pharmacies out of business, and Pritzker was largely successful this session in barring these practices, as a bill carrying language to restrict PBM costs passed the legislature with broad bipartisan support. The bill now heading to Pritzker's desk would prohibit PBMs from charging insurance companies more for drugs than they are paid by pharmacies and pocketing the difference; prohibit them from giving better reimbursement rates to pharmacies that the same company owns; and require them to pass along rebates negotiated with drugmakers to health plans and patients. Pritzker indicated Saturday that he would sign the measure, which would also require PBMs to submit annual reports on pricing and other practices to the Illinois Department of Insurance. The measure would charge PBMs an annual $15-per-patient fee, with the first $25 million collected going to a grant fund to support local pharmacies. Supporters of PBMs during the session argued Pritzker's plan was flawed, as they see PBMs as saving patients and employers money partly by negotiating with drugmakers. What Pritzker proposed: As part of the package of policies he announced in February, Pritzker said he'd push several other initiatives, including funding to remediate dilapidated state sites and an easier path for voters to reduce or eliminate local township governments. Status: State site funding passed; township idea stalled. Pritzker received his requested $500 million in state capital funds for two key programs on state sites, including $300 million to remake five or more largely abandoned properties, which would help develop properties 'sitting idle' in areas that are 'ripe' for economic growth, according to his budget proposals. The state's previous investments in site readiness have generated over $1.5 billion in private investment and the now-passed initiatives could attract more than $4.7 billion in investment, the governor's office said in February. Yet an effort to consolidate smaller townships across the state did not gain much traction as neither bill in the House nor the Senate made it out of committee. Pritzker's office said in February that many of the more than 1,400 townships operating across the state — which levy over $750 million in property taxes — provide services that are duplicative or could be managed more efficiently by municipalities or counties. Townships often provide maintenance and services for rural areas, such as road maintenance and transportation for seniors. Still, several Illinois townships have been tangled with corruption, such as the recent federal investigation of Dolton Mayor and Thornton Township Supervisor Tiffany Henyard over improper spending of taxpayer dollars. The idea of consolidating townships has faltered for a century, partly due to opposition from politicians seeking to preserve their power, as well as concerns that downstate rural areas could lose their civic identity. ____
San Francisco Chronicle
33 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
North Carolina governor forms council to recommend cannabis regulations
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein says a panel he's tasked with recommending cannabis sale regulations — including potential legalization of adult use of marijuana — should aim to provide a structure in a state where products now from otherwise lawful hemp are unregulated and leave young people unprotected. The Democratic governor signed an executive order this week creating a State Advisory Council on Cannabis. North Carolina is among a small number of states whose laws prohibit marijuana for both medicinal use or adult recreational use. The General Assembly would have to enact any law legalizing marijuana. The council's findings could add pressure upon lawmakers to place regulations on products, many of which can be obtained at vape and convenience stores. The order directs the 24-member council also named this week to offer preliminary recommendations for a 'comprehensive cannabis policy' and any proposed legislation by next March 15, with final recommendations by the end of 2026. Council members include representatives of state agencies, law enforcement, legislators and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, whose dispensary on tribal land has sold since last year marijuana and cannabis products to any adult over 21. 'Let's work together on a thoughtful, comprehensive solution that allows sales to adults and that is grounded in public safety and health.' Stein said Wednesday in a news release. 'We can work together and get this right.' Hemp is actually a lawful form of cannabis in the state based on its low levels of THC, the chemical that in larger amounts makes people high. Consumable products made from hemp promote CBD, the non-psychoactive chemical within it. But Stein, the former attorney general, says some in the hemp product industry have found ways to extract enough THC from hemp so that their offerings also provide the high of marijuana. He said this has led to an unregulated "Wild West" cannabis market in which anyone, including children, can purchase products with 'intoxicating THC.' In an interview with WRAL-TV on Tuesday, Stein said that he personally supports legalizing adult recreational use of marijuana and other intoxicating THC products, and believes a structure can be put in place that simultaneously keeps them away from children. 'I believe adults should be able to choose what they want to do, but they need to have information,' Stein said. 'They need to be protected.' Legislation that would authorize medical marijuana have cleared the Senate in the recent past occasions but have failed to pass the House. Council members include Republican state Sen. Bill Rabon and GOP Rep. John Bell. Rabon has championed medical marijuana legalization at the General Assembly, while Bell is an executive at a manufacturer of CBD and hemp-based products and who has called for stricter industry regulation. Stein said Wednesday the council should propose developing a regulatory system that "allows adult sales, ensures public safety, promotes public health, supports North Carolina agriculture, expunges past convictions of simple THC possession, and invests the revenues in resources for addiction, mental health, and drugged driving detection.' The order says recommendations also should consider taxation. For now, Stein said, the General Assembly should pass laws prohibiting sales of products with intoxicating THC to anyone under 2021 and set packaging standards. Thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia allow the medical use of cannabis products, while about half of the states and D.C. have legalized small amounts of cannabis for adult recreational use, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
UPI
39 minutes ago
- UPI
Supreme Court revives straight woman's 'reverse discrimination' suit
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday that a straight woman denied a management position in favor of gay hires can revive her Title VII Civil Rights Act job discrimination lawsuit. File Photo by Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States/UPI | License Photo June 5 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday that a straight woman can move forward with her Title VII Civil Rights Act job discrimination lawsuit, which claimed "reverse discrimination." The justices voted 9-0 to side with Marlean Ames, ruling that she faced a higher burden to be able to sue for discrimination as a straight woman after she was passed up for job opportunities in favor of two LGBTQ applicants. "We conclude that Title VII does not impose such a heightened standard on majority-group plaintiffs," the court wrote. Ames sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services after she was denied a management position in favor of a lesbian woman hired for that job. She also lost out on another job at the agency when a gay man was hired instead as a program administrator. The lower court judgment was vacated and the Ames case was remanded back to the lower court to be heard applying the Supreme Court's finding. The decision said the Sixth Circuit erred when it "implemented a rule that requires certain Title VII plaintiffs-those who are members of majority groups-to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard." The ruling makes it easier for majority-group plaintiffs to argue "reverse discrimination" lawsuits. At issue was the "background circumstances" rule. As interpreted by the Sixth Circuit, that rule requires members of a majority group to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII lawsuits. "Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone," the Supreme Court decision said. "The Sixth Circuit's 'background circumstances' rule requires plaintiffs who are members of a majority group to bear an additional burden at step one. But the text of Title VII's disparate-treatment provision draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs." The Supreme Court said that provision "focuses on individuals rather than groups, barring discrimination against 'any individual' because of protected characteristics." The high court rejected Ohio's argument that the "background circumstances" rule does not subject majority-group plaintiffs to a heightened legal standard when they sue alleging discrimination under Title VII. "The 'background circumstances' rule -- which subjects all majority-group plaintiffs to the same, highly specific evidentiary standard in every case -- ignores the Court's instruction to avoid inflexible applications of the prima facie standard," the Supreme Court wrote. The Supreme Court held that "the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group." The Civil Rights Act bars discrimination based on "race, color, religion, sex or national origin." Ohio maintained Ames was not chosen for the jobs in question due to her lack of the necessary vision and leadership skills, not because she was straight. A three-judge Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals panel agreed that Ames would have been likely to prevail if she was a gay woman. But they ruled against her due to the higher burden created by the Sixth Circuit interpretation of the "background circumstances" rule.
