Massachusetts City Considering ‘Generational Ban’ on Nicotine Products
Another Massachusetts city is considering a “generational ban” on nicotine products for people who were born on or after January 1, 2004.
According to WBZ-TV and Boston.com, Medford could be joining the growing roster of cities in the state to pass such a ban on nicotine products. Medford’s Board of Health tabled a discussion on the potential ban during a hearing on Tuesday (September 17). The reason cited was to gather more information on the matter.
Boston University law professor Katharine Silbaugh was disappointed in the tabling decision and told Boston.com, “(Medford) will be a regional island where there will still be new people aging into the use of tobacco. Hopefully, they have a chance to revisit it.”
In 2021, Brookline, Mass. was the first city in the United States to pass a generational ban on the sale of nicotine products as a way to curb the use of cigarettes and vapes. Their law prevents the sale of nicotine products to people born on or after January 1, 2000. Following Brookline, six other Massachusetts cities adopted similar bans: Melrose, Wakefield, Stoneham, Malden, Reading and Winchester.
According to the CDC, cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. Smoking and secondhand smoke causes over 480,000 deaths every year in the country. Smoking can cause a number of health issues, including cancer, heart disease, stroke, Type 2 diabetes and various lung diseases like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). These health issues can also occur to those impacted by secondhand smoke.
Naturally, there are some who oppose such bans. One of the major opponents of a generational ban on nicotine products is the New England Convenience Store & Energy Marketers Association (NECSEMA). Executive Director of NECSEMA Peter Brennan told Boston.com that these bans are discriminatory and “enormously frustrating” to convenience store clerks.
When Brookine’s ban was passed following a ruling from the state Supreme Judicial Court (SJC), Brennan issued a blistering statement saying, “The SJC has careened down a slippery slope by affirming Brookline’s ban on all nicotine product purchases by all adults born this century. We are reviewing the ruling, but it is clearly rooted in authoritarianism by supporting the legal idea that there is no such thing as an adult with inalienable rights unless those rights are first granted to a citizen by government. The ruling sets a disturbing precedent by granting authority to local boards of health to decide who is “adult enough” to make decisions, regardless of what state or federal laws say on the issue.”
