As part of a trial court case returned on remand, casino workers are hoping for another chance to overturn smoking being permitted in New Jersey gambling environments.
A group of lobbyists and union representatives has been arguing that there should be a ban on smoking where staff are at risk of second-hand smoke.
Casino Employees Against Smoking Effects (CEASE) and the union representatives now have a chance, after the case was originally denied, to proceed again at the trial court level in New Jersey.
Case sent back to New Jersey trial court after appellate ruling
The defendants and respondents in the case file are New Jersey Governor Philip Murphy and Acting Health Commissioner Dr. Kaitlin Baston, who will be required to respond alongside the Casino Association of New Jersey.
UAW members have filed a lawsuit seeking to end the unconstitutional casino smoking exemption in New Jersey.
“For almost two decades casino workers have been fighting for the same legal protections that other New Jersey workers have, the right to work in a place free of toxic… pic.twitter.com/BI6oMLg9nt
— UAW (@UAW) April 5, 2024
CEASE and the other complaining parties believe that the ability for patrons to still be permitted to smoke at gambling locations is a breach of the New Jersey Smoke-Free Air Act of 2006.
The case was originally heard at trial and denied both a preliminary and a permanent injunction on the grounds that no fundamental, standalone constitutional right to safety was breached, ruling in favor of the respondents.
The appellate court has now reviewed the case, in which CEASE argues that allowing smoking in casinos violates state constitutional guarantees of safety and equal protection.
Casino smoking challenge continues
On January 26, 2026, New Jersey’s Appellate Division affirmed a trial court’s denial of a preliminary injunction that would have immediately halted smoking in casino gaming areas. However, the appellate court vacated the trial court’s dismissal of the case with prejudice and its effective denial of permanent injunctive relief, finding that the lower court applied the wrong legal framework when evaluating the workers’ equal protection claims.
The case has now been remanded for further proceedings, including additional fact-finding and proper application of New Jersey’s three-factor equal protection balancing test.
Featured image: Adobe Firefly
