WASHINGTON — Cast in the good-guy role of stopping Internet cigarette sales to children, Maine’s deputy attorney general got roughed up Wednesday by Supreme Court justices who suggested the law is not on his side.
Paul Stern argued that his state, like many others, is trying to keep tobacco from underage smokers and that cannot be done without the help of companies that deliver cigarettes bought over the Internet.
Maine says delivery companies must check packages against a list from the state of known unlicensed tobacco retailers. The shipping companies must deliver only to the person to whom the package is addressed and a recipient younger than 27 must present identification before the package can be delivered.
Congress has encouraged the states “to deal with the significant public health problem of youth access to tobacco,” Stern told the court, arguing for the right to regulate cigarette shipments bought online.
Shipping industry associations say only the federal government can impose such delivery requirements.
Federal law bars states from regulating prices, routes or services of shipping companies, and Maine’s law “certainly relates to the service” of the shipping companies, Chief Justice John Roberts said.
“It talks about what carriers have to do,” Roberts added.
Recent research says children as young as 11 were successful more than 90 percent of the time in buying cigarettes over the Internet.
The case also involves the issue of uncollected state taxes. One study found that three-quarters of Internet tobacco sellers say they will not report cigarette sales to tax officials. A private research firm found states lose as much as $1.4 billion annually in uncollected tobacco taxes on the Internet.
The lost revenue is a concern to Maine and about 40 other states that have tried to prohibit or severely restrict the direct delivery of tobacco products to consumers.
The differences in the state laws are a burden to business, several justices suggested.
Two lower federal courts have rejected Maine’s law. The Supreme Court is expected to rule by June.
