Supreme Court sides with the FDA in its dispute over sweet-flavored vaping products The justices’ unanimous decision is not the final word in the case, however

https://www.statnews.com/2025/04/02/supreme-court-fda-sweet-flavored-vaping-products/?utm_campaign=morning_rounds&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_1D6i285mgisoM9YYnmydIaZIPkvaZURo8U2kWR-j6VrImNSGb-swsxa2tsmQrldxjh5KrUbMC30tAH3efDugOXfiHPA&_hsmi=354890839&utm_content=354890839&utm_source=hs_email Meanwhile, at the Supreme Court Three health-related cases came before the high court yesterday. Here’s what you need to know: The justices ruled unanimously in favor of the FDA in a case regarding the agency’s crackdown on sweet-flavored vapes. It did not violate federal law, they said, by denying a company’s application to sell flavors like “Jimmy The Juice Man in Peachy Strawberry” and “Suicide Bunny Mother’s Milk and Cookies.” But the battle isn’t quite over yet — read more. The court also ruled in favor of a truck driver who failed a drug test and lost his job after taking a CBD supplement for chronic pain that was advertised as not having THC in it. In a 5-4 decision, the justices decided that Douglas Horn can continue with an anti-racketeering lawsuit to hold the company that made the product responsible. Later in the morning, the court heard oral arguments in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic. In 2018, the governor of South Carolina issued an executive order prohibiting any clinic where abortions are performed from participating in state Medicaid. The Supreme Court is considering one specific question: Can people on Medicaid sue the state over a ban like this, citing the Medicaid Act’s free choice of provider? Planned Parenthood argued that patients should be able to do so, while the Trump administration and South Carolina said no. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/supreme-court-sides-with-truck-driver-fired-for-taking-cbd-oil?utm_campaign=morning_rounds&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_JbwEHMsJYXWiZ5kxbv6_7astB8c5xB9gTKd_k2M86iHkWgTi0bi6wzEHlJSCdLFjU7iYRTzPveKV3DLrry__xPtT8Bg&_hsmi=354890839&utm_content=354890839&utm_source=hs_email The justices are expected to issue a ruling by the end of the term this June. The outcome will have implications for people seeking reproductive care in South Carolina, but also in several other states that have similarly attempted to keep Planned Parenthood out of their Medicaid networks. If you want to learn more, KFF published a great primer on the case, and Vox’s Ian Millhiser wrote some helpful analysis after the arguments about how politics could interfere with the law. What’s at Stake in the Supreme Court Case Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic? Laurie Sobel, Usha Ranji, and Alina Salganicoff Published: Apr 01, 2025 https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/whats-at-stake-in-the-supreme-court-case-medina-v-planned-parenthood-south-atlantic/?utm_campaign=morning_rounds&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8WX2Nyizl-4srKIzA8f8lorOYaxAuASSAm5r3Bppr6ALLX7kOsdhPXVjtZaA6SNTmmmzGZAc9gHt_qmrmerx9_ORAkkQ&_hsmi=354890839&utm_content=354890839&utm_source=hs_email