Minneapolis Cigar Lounge Sues City Over 15-Minute Smoking Limitation
The Minneapolis City Council ed a law last year that prohibited cigar smokers from smoking for more than 15 minutes inside tobacco shops. To add insult to injury, there’s only one cigar shop in Minneapolis where smoking indoors is allowed. The ordinance felt targeted and unnecessary to cigar smokers locally and beyond, and now the shop, Anthony’s Pipe & Cigar Lounge, is fighting back. In late March, owner Hadi Aboumourad and his lawyer, John Sperry, filed a lawsuit against the city with hopes that the court will repeal the ordinance.
Around this time last year, the City Council ed a series of tobacco-control measures, but none was more shocking than the 15-minute time limit on cigar smoking. The ordinance was the City Council’s way of expanding, or changing, the definition of what the state refers to as “sampling.” According to the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act (MCIAA), ed by the state in 2007, customers are permitted to smoke cigars in licensed indoor areas “for the specific purpose of sampling tobacco products.” Anthony’s Pipe & Cigar Lounge, using the state’s classification, has offered a lounge area for sampling (i.e. smoking) cigars for several years. As far as the state is concerned, the line with sampling ends there. There are no restrictions on time, the number of tobacco products one can sample or other limitations of any kind. The city, however, introduced a more strict definition for sampling last year, limiting sampling to a mere 15 minutes. But, it doesn’t take an aficionado to know that you can’t smoke a cigar in 15 minutes, not even a short one.
The city believes it is operating within its legal rights, despite changing the way sampling is defined. Minnesota is a local authority state in regards to tobacco control, meaning local municipalities are granted the authority, via the state, “to adopt and enforce more stringent measures to protect individuals from secondhand smoke.” The city holds the position that it has the right to create a stricter definition of sampling. John Sperry, Anthony’s attorney, disagreed then and disagrees now. “It’s without any demonstrative health benefit that avoids secondhand smoke exposure to non-smokers, which is a fundamental purpose of the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act,” Sperry told Cigar Aficionado in 2024. “We see that [the 15-minute sampling window] as a death by a thousand cuts.”
Anthony’s filed its lawsuit against the city on March 27. In Sperry’s view, the City has a wholly different interpretation of the MCIAA definition of sampling and the authority granted to local municipalities. Sperry believes when the state created its sampling exemption, it wanted to protect the non-smoking public while still reaffirming the legitimacy of tobacco shops and the rights of smokers. He says the state made a “thoughtful, deliberate decision” when creating its sampling definition, purposely not specifying a time limit or the number of the samples allowed, while also making a clear exemption for cigar smokers to enjoy a smoke in licensed tobacco product shops. “They can’t outright ban something that the state statute clearly permits and expresses as an exemption," says Sperry. “Fifteen minutes of sampling and then prohibiting it after 15 minutes is still a prohibition of sampling, right?” The question of enforceability regarding the 15-minute time limit also still remains unanswered.
Sperry argues that the city’s ordinance “irreconcilably conflicts” with the state’s definition of sampling. In his view, the city has exceeded the authority granted by the state. “We agree that they have the right to enact more restrictive measures, but that right is not plenary,” says Sperry. “In other words, there’s nothing in the statute that s the vilification of smokers.” The city hasn’t been clear on how the smoking time limit within licensed cigar shops protects non-smokers from secondhand smoke exposure, which, based on the state’s language, is the only purpose for local municipalities to enact stricter measures than the state.
The city’s rebuttal in this case essentially amounts to a full denial of the complaints. On the positive side of things, Sperry tells Cigar Aficionado that the city ordinance has not actually been enforced yet, despite going into effect last December 1. Sperry says the city assured him they would not enforce the ordinance unless a complaint is made. While Anthony’s appreciates the gesture, it still feels the legislation was targeted and that it leaves the cigar shop standing on uneasy ground. “The problem for Anthony’s is you can’t operate a retail business under the uncertainty that someone is going to make a complaint,” says Sperry.
Anthony’s is not seeking monetary damages through the lawsuit. “We are asking for abrogation of the 15-minute sampling definition and limitation,” says Sperry. The lawsuit in this case is seeking a declaratory judgement, meaning Anthony’s is asking for the courts to make a ruling on the ordinance enacted by the Minneapolis City Council. Sperry is hoping the court will declare the ordinance void and permanently prohibit the city from enforcing it. There are several possible outcomes that could emerge from this process, but the two most likely options are the courts disagree and the city’s sampling definition remains, or they agree with Anthony’s and repeal the 15-minute time limit.
In the meantime, Sperry has requested a temporary injunction on the ordinance while the lawsuit plays out. This would make the ordinance unenforceable while the lawsuit works its way through the court. A hearing is set to decide on the temporary injunction on May 29, at 11 am. The city, as expected, is opposed to any injunctive relief.
“We’re very confident on the basis of our challenge,” says Sperry. After the hearing, Sperry says the courts will eventually issue a “scheduling order,” which essentially lays out a timeline for the various steps and processes ahead. Despite Sperry’s confidence, a long legal battle likely lies ahead for Anthony’s.
An official GoFundMe has been set-up to Anthony’s legal fight, which you find here: https://www.gofundme.com/f/-anthonys-fight-for-small-business-rights
