Agreed, But with warning labels on the products, it’s a simple answer. The consumer have been warned of the risk they are taking by using the product.
These used to be very popular at parties. 'Manufacturer's advice: Cigarettes are addictive and debilitating. If you don't smoke, don't start. Death is a responsible way to market a legally available consumer product which kills people when used exactly as intended. Death cigarettes: For an honest smoke' Packet of 20 Death cigarettes, London, England, 1999 | Science Museum Group Collection
JUUL settled lawsuits with North Carolina (what seems to have triggered the original posting) and several months later with Arizona. These were civil lawsuits, and JUUL had the resources to see the litigation through. The company decided not to. The attorneys general of both states brought the actions under state laws that gave the AGs the authority to pursue civil actions under laws prohibiting unfair or deceptive trade practices. Calling either case "extortion" is misleading. It's an orderly legal process, and JUUL may have prevailed at verdict or on appeal. State AGs generally do not appeal when they are on the losing end of civil lawsuits. A dismissal by the judges or wins at the initial trials for JUUL would have been the ends of these matters. Sure, it's expensive, but JUUL is profitable and has a large revenue stream, and defending would have cost JUUL a lot less than the $54 million that JUUL agreed to pay ($40 million to North Carolina and $14+ million to Arizona). The idea of "big brother" having the legal authority to take such action is not such a bad thing. We, as individuals harmed by unfair or deceptive trade practices, have no practical ability to go after large companies that are harming the public. It's not entirely a bad thing for people to elect representatives to legislate against bad business practices, and to elect AGs who enforce those laws through civil lawsuits. These two cases may have been unwinnable - that depends in large part of what state law says and whether the evidence was sufficient. As a result of JUUL's decisions to settle, we'll never know. I can't see JUUL as a victim of extortion, nor the people of North Carolina and Arizona being harmed, on balance, by what their AGs did. NC's AG isn't a boomer. At age 55, he's too young to be a baby boomer. Your hostility toward the elderly may be very real, but it's misplaced in this case.
North Carolina does have fields of tobacco growing alongside roads. I passed several on a road trip last year. Finally I'd seen enough, found a place to pull off, grabbed several of the big yellowing leaves from the bottom of a couple plants. Brought them home and dried them out. Good stuff! I'm smoking some right now!