Skip to main content

No. 23-1038October Term 2024Decided Apr 2, 2025

Docket 23-1038October Term 2024 (2024–2025)

Food and Drug Administration, Petitioner v. Wages and White Lion Investments, L.L.C., dba Triton Distribution, et al.

The Supreme Court ruled that the FDA did not act arbitrarily or capriciously when it denied applications to market flavored e-cigarette products, finding the agency's requirement for robust scientific evidence was consistent with the Tobacco Control Act.

Case status

Current stage
Decided
Latest event
Decision released Apr 2, 2025
Case AcceptedJul 2, 2024
Arguments HeardDec 2, 2024
Decision ReleasedApr 2, 2025
What it's about

The Supreme Court ruled that the FDA did not act arbitrarily or capriciously when it denied applications to market flavored e-cigarette products, finding the agency's requirement for robust scientific evidence was consistent with the Tobacco Control Act. The Court also clarified the harmless-error standard under the Administrative Procedure Act, determining that the FDA's failure to review marketing plans did not prejudice the outcome.

Question presented

Was the Food and Drug Administration’s orders denying respondents’ applications for authorization to market new e-cigarette products arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act?

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit / Decision released Apr 2, 2025

Area

Administrative Law