Appeals Court Revives Challenge to New Jersey Casino Smoking Ban
Background of the Legal Dispute
The ongoing controversy surrounding smoking regulations inside New Jersey casinos has taken another turn. A state appeals court recently determined that a lower court mishandled a case concerning the fairness of the state’s indoor smoking ban, effectively sending the matter back for reconsideration.
Issues with the Initial Court Proceedings
On January 26, 2026, an appellate panel instructed the trial court to reopen the case to properly assess whether the state’s ban on indoor smoking unfairly excludes casinos, which could violate the New Jersey Constitution. The appeals judges found procedural errors in the earlier ruling, highlighting that crucial aspects such as witness testimonies and detailed factual analysis were overlooked, impairing a thorough and balanced review.
The dispute centers around the 2006 Smoke-Free Air Act, which prohibits indoor smoking throughout New Jersey but uniquely exempts casinos and simulcasting venues. Workers on casino floors, represented by the United Auto Workers union, have long campaigned to remove this exemption arguing it exposes them to health risks.
The Court’s Review of Evidence and Legal Standards
Previously, a judge dismissed the union’s lawsuit in 2024, citing mainly written arguments without holding evidentiary hearings. However, the appeals court criticized this approach, remarking that proper factual findings are essential—especially given the health concerns for thousands of casino employees and the significant financial implications involved.
Judge Jack Sabatino, writing for the panel, emphasized the importance of comprehensive fact-finding for resolving equal protection claims brought by the workers.
Continuing Campaign and Legislative Context
Casino workers turned to the courts after legislative attempts to close the smoking exemption failed, with lawmakers citing potential negative financial impacts on Atlantic City casinos as a key concern.
The workers contend that the current law forces them to face harmful secondhand smoke, unlike other indoor employees who are protected by the ban. The trial court previously rejected these arguments, suggesting workers could find alternative employment and that casino revenues rely heavily on allowing smoking.
Appeals Court’s Findings on Legal and Evidentiary Issues
The appeals court disagreed with the lower court’s reasoning, noting the judge applied an insufficient legal test (rational-basis review) rather than the more rigorous three-part balancing test required under New Jersey’s equal protection doctrine.
The panel further criticized the trial court’s heavy reliance on a casino-supported study predicting major revenue losses if smoking was banned, while underestimating studies indicating comparable results between smoking and non-smoking casinos.
While the appeals court refrained from determining whether the state constitution guarantees a right to workplace safety, it indicated such a significant constitutional question should be resolved by the New Jersey Supreme Court.
Next Steps for the Case
The legal battle over the casino smoking ban now returns to the trial court for a renewed and thorough hearing, as mandated by the appellate panel to ensure proper consideration of all evidence and legal standards involved.
