More Tobacco Bans Coming In California And Massachusetts

[JohnS]

More Tobacco Bans Coming In California And Massachusetts

Oct 23, 2025 - By Garrett Rutledge 

Photo/Ian Dagnall/Alamy Stock Photo 

On both coasts of the continental United States, outright bans on selling tobacco products are proliferating. Last week, the Tiburon, California Town Council unanimously approved an ordinance that will completely ban the sale of cigars and products made with tobacco or containing nicotine in the city to all citizens, regardless of age; it will take effect December 5. In South Hadley, Massachusetts, the Board of Health voted to implement a generational tobacco ban in the city, meaning anyone born on or after January 1, 2005 won’t be permitted to purchase tobacco products in that town—ever.

In Tiburon (population of approximately 9,000), the legislation was prompted by a local advocacy group of Marin County high school students. The group brought the request to the Town Council, and while a second vote is scheduled for November 5, it is largely considered a formality at this point. The group that made this happen is now working to try and do the same in the nearby town of Ross, California.  

After examining the statements from council members and advocacy groups involved in the Tiburon ordinance, it’s clear that the main target here was vapes and nicotine pouches common among youth. Nevertheless, premium, handmade cigars were not spared. There are currently no tobacco retail stores in Tiburon, and the latest ordinance all but ensures there never will be. However, Jaime Rojas, a spokesperson for the National Association of Tobacco Retailers, questioned the need for such legislation. “If Tiburon youth are using tobacco products, then it is definitely because they bought those products either online or outside the city limits,” he said in a statement, arguing the ordinance causes more problems than it solves. 

Tiburon is not the first jurisdiction in California to enact such measures. Similar legislation exists in Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach, although both have exemptions in place that can spare premium cigars in some contexts. The Tiburon ordinance has no exemptions. 

(Photo/David L. Ryan/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)

On the opposite coast, another Massachusetts town has joined an increasingly growing number of townships that have implemented generational tobacco bans. This month, South Hadley (population ~ 18,000), located about 90 miles west of Boston, implemented a generational tobacco ban, mirroring the “Nicotine-Free Generation” laws that continue to spread across the state. In this case, the sale of tobacco products to anyone born on or after January 1, 2005 will be illegal going forward. 

South Hadley is now one of many towns in Massachusetts that has either implemented or tried to implement a generational tobacco ban in the state. As of now, some of the confirmed towns with generational bans in place include Northampton, Belchertown, Brookline, Hopkinton, Newton, Stoneham, Melrose, Reading, Malden and Wakefield. Brookline set off the chain reaction in 2020, implementing the first such ban. The legislation was legally challenged, but it was ultimately upheld by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in 2024. Ever since that ruling, more and more towns continue to follow suit. In the state legislature, matching, statewide generational tobacco ban bills were introduced this year in the House and Senate, although there has been little movement on either for several months.

In both states, the key factor is local authority. Massachusetts and California, specifically as it relates to tobacco control legislation, allow for local jurisdictions to implement their own tobacco-related regulations, regardless of how they differ from the state. In both instances, there are no such bans at the state level, but because of local authority, townships and local jurisdictions are permitted to enact stricter regulations than the state measures. Not every state allows this, but it’s obviously a key point of contention as it relates to cigars in particular. 

“The trend has become to have local authority legislation introduced in the absence of the state legislature being able to enact similar ordinances and laws themselves. It becomes an easy out for state legislatures,” Glynn Loope, the Premium Cigar Association’s (PCA) director of state advocacy, told Cigar Aficionado back in 2024. “Our argument is that it just creates a confusing patchwork of ordinances that vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.”

Source: https://www.cigaraficionado.com/article/more-tobacco-bans-coming-in-california-and-massachusetts

[Ford2112]

What a bunch of candy asses.

[NYGuido]

I’d like to see someone challenge this in federal court under the supremacy clause of the constitution. The argument would be that the nationwide law setting 21 as the age for tobacco completely preempts conflicting state regulation in all directions—that is, states can’t make the age limit lower but also can’t effectively make it higher by setting a year of birth floor. There are other preemption arguments, too, that they could make. But there’s a reasonable argument to be made that this isn’t lawful as a federal matter. 

You’d need an individual resident of that town who was born after the cutoff and who has turned 21 to have standing, though they may be able to get PCA or CRA to have institutional standing based on the impact to retailers and manufacturers. 

[Gemini_Man]

Bet you it's the same crowd banning books from schools. 

[BrightonCorgi]

They love patting themselves on the back for their virtue in the Commonwealth. Tobacco is evil. Hashish and marijuana is benign. Walk around tourist areas of Boston and it smells like Phish concert. Hopefully a syringe doesn't stick you. At least there's no tobacco.  

Over a million syringes given out in Boston according to some statistics, but they worry about tobacco

BPHC Syringe Distribution Data (2018–2024) • MuckRock 

[Ford2112]

Tiburon and Marin are full of rich granola grannies who spend 1000 dollars in dog grooming and botox injections and hate men. 

[tbelle7]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15228599/boston-south-end-drugs-homelessness.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-twitter_mailonline

Tobacco Bad!!!

[gormag38]

11 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

They love patting themselves on the back for their virtue in the Commonwealth. Tobacco is evil. Hashish and marijuana is benign. Walk around tourist areas of Boston and it smells like Phish concert. Hopefully a syringe doesn't stick you. At least there's no tobacco.  

Over a million syringes given out in Boston according to some statistics, but they worry about tobacco

BPHC Syringe Distribution Data (2018–2024) • MuckRock 

You're not wrong. Walking around Cambridge this summer I saw NUMEROUS discarded needles laying around. I was quite shocked at how numerous they seemed.

[Hammer Smokin']

Yah, that's not due to any form of weed or tobacco ban (or lack thereof). 

[Mr. DD]

Tobacco users are slowly becoming criminals, one ban at a time. In my honest opinion, cigar smokers are particularly discriminated against. Bans on outdoor smoking and smoking areas are especially painful. For me, dog walking and a short cigar is a thing of the past (unless I take my dog out at 2 a.m.).

[NYGuido]

12 hours ago, Mr. DD said:

Tobacco users are slowly becoming criminals, one ban at a time. In my honest opinion, cigar smokers are particularly discriminated against. Bans on outdoor smoking and smoking areas are especially painful. For me, dog walking and a short cigar is a thing of the past (unless I take my dog out at 2 a.m.). 

I lived in the Bay Area for almost 5 years, and I found CA to be the most tobacco-hostile place I've ever lived. NYC is bad, sure, but I kinda get it---there are a ton of people in a small place, and indoor smoking bans for commercial establishments and dense, multi-unit housing (which often is old and doesn't have good ventilation) is at least in the realm of rational. But at least NYC allows smoking outside (except in parks--THAT part is insane to me). California, though, seems not to let you smoke ANYWHERE.

[Ford2112]

12 hours ago, NYGuido said:

I lived in the Bay Area for almost 5 years, and I found CA to be the most tobacco-hostile place I've ever lived. NYC is bad, sure, but I kinda get it---there are a ton of people in a small place, and indoor smoking bans for commercial establishments and dense, multi-unit housing (which often is old and doesn't have good ventilation) is at least in the realm of rational. But at least NYC allows smoking outside (except in parks--THAT part is insane to me). California, though, seems not to let you smoke ANYWHERE.

I was born and raised here. Yes, it's tobacco hostile as far as smoking on patios and whatnot but I smoke everywhere I want out in public. I had a young woman fake cough at me on the pier recently as I was smoking a Tatuaje right next to a no smoking sign. Not enforced, has a picture of cigarette, and all the weed smoking, alcoholic crack heads just a few yards down is my counter argument. 

These anti-smoking and tobacco sales laws are reminiscent of draconian measures like prohibition. People drive around here smoking weed like gangbusters but I cant smoke? Sorry, not sorry. Most people I encounter tell me they love the smell of my cigar. It's just BS legislation by a special offended group of pantywaists and sissies. Except my friend Ed. He always tells me to get that stinky piece of shit away from him. I make sure to position myself upwind.

[FOHgetaboutit]

On 10/27/2025 at 3:34 PM, Ford2112 said:

What a bunch of candy asses.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.