Attorney General's Office outlines lawsuit against retailers and urges stronger enforcement to curb youth vaping

An official from the New Mexico Attorney General's Office described a lawsuit filed March 31 targeting retailers and distributors of flavored disposable e-cigarettes and urged coordinated enforcement to reduce youth vaping.

"This was filed on the March 31, and it targets, some prominent retailers and prominent distributors of flavored ecigarettes," the Attorney General's Office representative said, describing New Mexico v. Circle K as part of a broader strategy to raise the cost of selling products that endanger children. The representative said the office is pursuing civil penalties under the state's unfair trade practices framework and noted "that's $5,000 per violation," which can accumulate against defendants.

The representative explained the legal theory and practical goals of the litigation: to deter retailers and distributors by imposing penalties large enough to affect market decisions. "We hope that by bringing this litigation, we will increase the cost of selling these vapes to a point where companies are going to think very hard about whether or not that's a product they want to market in New Mexico," the official said. The office identified defendants including national retail chains and distributors that ship large volumes into the state.

The representative also told the committee the products often reach shelves with limited oversight. "They are basically direct from the factory to the shelf with very little, analysis," the official said, and characterized flavored disposable e-cigarettes as having demonstrated youth appeal and high nicotine yields.

The representative outlined related, nonlitigation efforts: New Mexico's attorney general joined multistate coalitions urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration not to relax draft guidance for approving flavored e-cigarettes, and the office is coordinating with payment-processing companies to disrupt online sales. The official said responses to the state suit are due in mid-June and that the office expects defenses about the scope of state enforcement.

Committee members pressed for clarity on prevention funding and enforcement in schools. One member asked whether vape detectors were funded through the litigation; the AG's representative said the office did not know and offered to investigate funding sources for the specific schools cited in the complaint. A committee member who said she had a middle-school daughter described widespread access to vaping among students and urged mandates and complementary prevention programming. "The addiction starts much earlier," she said.

The chair asked whether nicotine pouches were covered by the suit; the Attorney General's Office representative said the current litigation focuses on disposable e-cigarettes and that pouches are not part of the filed complaint, though the office continues to evaluate other nicotine products. The chair suggested legislators could pursue tax or statutory changes and offered to meet with Attorney General Torres and AG staff to discuss possible funding or statutory approaches to support enforcement.

The hearing produced no formal votes. The committee agreed to follow up on outstanding funding questions and scheduled the next meeting to review the Department of Health and Medicaid financial matters.