Philadelphia blunt ban

Philadelphia blunt ban
Citation	Phila. Bill No. 060345

Philadelphia Bill No. 060345, colloquially known as the Philadelphia blunt ban, was an ordinance in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania which banned the retail sale of any item "where the seller knows, or under the circumstances reasonably should know" that it would be used to "convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale or otherwise introduce into the human body a controlled substance in violation of the Pennsylvania Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act". It was an amendment to Chapter 9-600, the "Service Businesses" section, of the Philadelphia Code. It was since overturned by a Philadelphia judge at the appeal of several big tobacco companies, citing the bill as unconstitutional. In 2008, the Commonwealth Court held that the ban was partially preempted by the Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act, 35 Pa. Stat. Ann. §§ 780-101-780-144. On January 19, 2011, in Holt's Cigar Co. v. Solvibile, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the Commonwealth Court's decision in part, holding that the entirety of the ban was preempted by the Controlled Substance Act.

Passage

The ban is the result of a campaign by Philadelphia police officer and community activist Jerry Rocks, Sr. Rocks's campaign, begun in October 2005, called for convenience stores to cease selling blunts, flavored cigars, cigarette papers, and other items used for smoking tobacco that can also be used as drug paraphernalia for smoking drugs such as marijuana. Rocks targeted his campaign particularly at Sunoco and Wawa Food Markets.

Councilman Brian J. O'Neill sponsored the bill, introducing it into the Philadelphia City Council in May 2006. After a public hearing at the Council in October 2006, at which Rocks testified, the 17 Council members voted unanimously on May 12 to pass the bill. On January 23, 2007, the bill was signed into law by Philadelphia Mayor John F. Street, with immediate effect.

Applicability

An apple modified into a pipe to smoke ("inhale", per this law's terminology) marijuana. This law bans any item that the seller would reasonably know could be used to "introduce into the human body" a drug.

Most stores are subject to the ordinance, although the following classes of business are exempt: hotels, restaurants with at least 25 seats, and specialty cigar shops. The penalty for a business violating the ordinance is a fine of between USD300 and USD1,500 per offense, and the possibility of the business's privilege license being revoked. The maximum fine rose to USD1,900 in 2008, and again to USD2,000 in 2009.

Councilman O'Neill has reported that some businesses intend to file a lawsuit, contesting the law. However, several companies have publicly announced that they will comply with the ordinance and have no plans to sue. Wawa had already imposed a voluntary ban on the sale of cigarette papers. When the bill passed the City Council vote, it pulled blunts from its stores. Both Wawa and Sunoco have stated that they are not suing the city. 7-Eleven has also stated that it will comply with the ordinance, and stated that it was unaware of any legal action being taken by stores against the city.

Extent

One area where the law is unclear is whether it encompasses the two "head" shops in the city, one of which has been operating in the city for more than 30 years. The shop, Artifax, at 2446 Cottman Avenue in the Northeast of the city, has a permit from the city granted in 1982, which was obtained as part of the resolution of a lawsuit filed in federal court by several "head" shops, that permits it to sell items that the new ordinance specifically bans. The permit specifically names "drug paraphernalia" as a category of permitted merchandise. Councilman O'Neill's opinion is that the new ordinance supersedes that permit.

It is widely agreed by both the ordinance's proponents and commentators that the ordinance bans the sale of "loosies", which are loose cigars that had been available at most inner-city convenience stores and take-away Chinese restaurants, as well as any cigarette, cigar, tiparillo, cigarillo, or other tobacco products, whether singly or in packages of fewer than three. Prior to passage of the bill, the Philadelphia Metro had reported that sales of "loosies" and cigars in packages of fewer than six would be banned.

However, what else the ordinance may ban is the subject of controversy. Rocks has stated that "It's not just a blunt bill. People try to weaken it by saying it just bans flavored cigars, but it's more than that—it's an anti-drug bill." Commentators such as Buley point out that "almost anything could be reasonably used as drug paraphernalia", including "sandwich bags, soda cans, apples, and aluminum foil—along with litany of other household items", all of which are potentially prohibited by the ordinance. Derek Rosenzweig, co-chair of the Philadelphia chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) has pointed out that the definition in the text of the law applies to almost anything, characterizing the law as "misguided" and the continuance of "a failed policy". Rocks, however, opines that there is a "reasonable difference" that can be found between things such as apples and drug paraphernalia. The president of Drexel NORML, the marijuana advocacy group at Drexel University, states that "Officer Rocks is underestimating how resourceful pot-smokers can be. One could easily fashion a pipe out of an apple or potato, and with little effort, a two-liter bottle can be transformed into a bong. The list goes on and on.", predicting that the law will have little effect on the smoking of marijuana, and will largely affect the smoking of tobacco.

Further reading

• "Philadelphia Bill No. 060345" (PDF). Philadelphia City Council. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)