The case is also about the appropriateness of Maine’s Tobacco Delivery Law.
The Tobacco Delivery Law puts safety requirements on all transportation of tobacco products. The law requires that stores which carry these products must use a delivery system that does not give any tobacco products to unlicensed stores or let them fall into the hands of minors (those under 18 years old). Based on this law, The New Hampshire Motor Transport Association filed suit, noting that the Tobacco Delivery Law was counteracted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA). “The preemption provision of the FAAAA prohibits state from enacting laws "related to" the prices, routes, or services of air and motor carriers. The Association argued that the Tobacco Delivery Law placed such a burden on the delivery procedures of carriers that significantly affected their prices and services” (Brief, 2010). Faced with this argument, those working for the state countered that the FAAAA was originally at cross purposes with the Tobacco Delivery Law, and that the purposes of the Tobacco Delivery Law generally were focused on regulating based on a threat to the harm of society.
In US District Court, the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association prevailed in its argument, and on appeal, this organization also prevailed in its argument again. “The First Circuit held that a police power exception to the general rule of preemption would be far too broad and was not intended by Congress. Maine could validly ban all unlicensed tobacco products within its borders, but the FAAAA prohibited the state from implementing this goal by imposing requirements on carriers that significantly alter their delivery procedures” (Rowe, 2010). Therefore, in the case, it was found that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 does not overshadow a state law that uses the