In this paper, we examine efforts by health organizations seeking comprehensive smokefree ordinances over Louisiana casinos and bars between 2010 and 2020 to determine best practices for increasing coverage. Bars and casinos remain less protected from secondhand smoke compared to other workplaces in the United States. Casino behavior is compared to the Policy Dystopia Model (PDM), a tobacco industry strategy framework. We performed a historical case study using snowball searches for news on the Access World News Database and the internet. We performed web searches using the names of key actors, organizations, and locations and interviewed nine participants. Starting in 2010, the Louisiana Campaign for Tobacco-Free Living ran ordinance campaigns supplemented by an ongoing statewide smokefree media initiative. Utilizing consistent strategies, including promoting performers as cultural emblems deserving protection, health organizations coalesced in New Orleans during 2014 and Baton Rouge in 2016 and 2017 to pursue ordinances. The coalitions secured ordinances in Louisiana's population and tourism centers despite business resistance. Organizations obtained 30 smokefree laws across Louisiana by 2021. Casinos used PDM strategies to resist ordinances, indicating the framework may predict strategies by non-tobacco entities resisting tobacco control. Louisiana shows that ongoing local campaigns, social justice themes and cultural messaging with coalitions in cities can secure smokefree laws covering casinos and bars and that local ordinance campaigns are a viable method for advancing smokefree protections over those venues in states where the state legislatures are resistant to action.

Background

In 2022, despite expanding state-level legalization, cannabis remained illegal at the federal level, driving drug offenses, and contact with the justice system. Cannabis criminalization disproportionately impacts minorities, and criminal records carry negative economic, health, and social consequences. Legalization prevents future criminalization but fails to assist existing record-holders. We surveyed 39 states and Washington DC where cannabis was decriminalized or legalized to determine record expungement availability and accessibility for cannabis offenders.

Methods

We performed a retrospective, qualitative survey of state expungement laws allowing record sealing or record destruction where cannabis use was decriminalized or legalized. Statutes were collected between February 25, 2021, and August 25, 2022, from state websites or NexisUni. We collected pardon information for two states from online state government resources. Materials were coded in Atlas.ti to determine if states had general, cannabis, and other drug conviction expungement regimes, petitions, or automated systems, waiting periods, and financial requirements. Codes were developed via inductive and iterative coding of materials.

Results

Among places surveyed, 36 provided any conviction expungement, 34 provided general relief, 21 offered cannabis-specific relief, and 11 offered general drug relief, nonexclusively. Most states used petitions. Thirty-three general and 7 cannabis-specific programs required waiting periods. Nineteen general and 4 cannabis programs imposed administrative fees, and 16 general and one cannabis-specific program required legal financial obligations to be paid.

Conclusion

Among the 39 states and Washington DC that decriminalized or legalized cannabis and offered expungement, more states relied on general rather than cannabis-specific systems, and the majority of these required record holders to petition for relief and imposed waiting periods and financial requirements. Research is needed to determine if automating expungement, reducing or eliminating waiting periods, and eliminating financial requirements may expand record relief for former cannabis offenders.

Importance

The cannabis industry has sought to normalize itself and expand its markets in the 21st century. One strategy used by companies to generate positive public relations is corporate social responsibility (CSR). It is critical to understand these efforts to influence the public and politicians given the risks of increased cannabis use.

Objectives

To analyze cannabis industry CSR behaviors, determine their characteristics, and compare their practices with those of the tobacco industry.

Design, setting, and participants

This qualitative study of CSR activities conducted between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2021, evaluated 9 of the 10 largest publicly traded cannabis companies in the US and Canada. Data were collected from August 1 to December 31, 2021. The 10th company was excluded because it engaged in cannabis-based pharmaceutical sales but not CSR. A systematic review of corporate websites and Nexis Uni was performed, resulting in collection of 153 news articles, press releases, and Web pages. Charitable and philanthropic actions were included. Themes were identified and interpreted using modified grounded theory.

Main outcomes and measures

CSR activities and spending.

Results

Nine major cannabis companies in the US and Canada engaged in CSR activities that encouraged increased consumption and targeted marginalized communities. Companies claimed these activities would mitigate the harms of cannabis prohibition, promote diversity, expand access to medical cannabis, and support charitable causes. They developed educational programs, sustainability initiatives, and voluntary marketing codes and used strategies similar to those used by tobacco companies to recruit public interest organizations as allies.

Conclusions and relevance

These findings suggest that cannabis companies developed CSR strategies comparable to those used by the tobacco industry to influence regulation, suggesting that cannabis companies should be included when addressing commercial determinants of health.

Background

Marketing of flavored tobacco products has drawn concern because they are used disproportionately by young people. Online retailers have marketed e-cigarette liquids and devices to minors despite knowing it is illegal. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in substantial increases in online purchasing, however, there has been limited study of possible shifts in online tobacco product marketing associated with this change.

Objectives

We sought to identify types of tobacco regulatory violations in 2021-2022, marketing claims made by retailers, the extent to which retailers had processes in place to deter minors from browsing websites, and the types of flavors promoted.

Design and methods

Our observational study was based on an initial sample of 100 tobacco retailers that had received FDA Warning Letters in 2020-2021. Using methods validated in previous research, we coded the letters for retailer information, violation type, and for retailers with an online presence, the types of products sold, and their marketing claims.

Results

Most retailers with violations were in the US South (48%), 65% had an online presence at the time of analysis, and 53% had a website that offered online product sales. The most common type of violation was the sale of new tobacco products without required marketing authorization (83%). For the retailers in the sample with active websites, 42% were still selling a product that the FDA had indicated was marketed unlawfully. Among these retailers with active websites, 32% did not have processes in place to deter access by minors. Advertised flavors focused on food (eg, mango, honey) and concepts (eg, "love", "classic").

Conclusions

Online retailers appeared less likely to remediate tobacco product violations identified by the FDA after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than before it, and few websites had strong processes in place that would deter youth browsing.