THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT brushed aside objections from tobacco retailers and upheld the legality of a novel Brookline bylaw that bars cigarette sales to anyone born after January 1, 2000.

The retailers argued that the 2021 Brookline bylaw was pre-empted by a state law approved in 2018 that raised the minimum age for purchasing a tobacco product from 18 to 21. The retailers pointed out that the Brookline bylaw effectively means someone born after January 1, 2000 will not be able to purchase a tobacco product regardless of their age. Over time, as the population ages, the bylaw will effectively ban the sale of tobacco products in the town.

In the Supreme Judicial Court’s unanimous opinion, written by Justice Dalila Wendlandt, the court acknowledged the Brookline bylaw is more restrictive than the state’s minimum age standard, but the justices were fine with that. They said the bylaw “augments the state statute” by further limiting access to tobacco products to persons under the age of 21.

The court rejected claims by the tobacco retailers that the state law was designed to clarify what had become a muddled regulatory environment as municipality after municipality raised the minimum age for buying tobacco products.

“The retailers claim that the purpose of the Tobacco Act was ‘actually to benefit tobacco retailers . . . by eliminating the confusion that arises when the minimum age for purchasing tobacco varies from town to town and city to city across the Commonwealth,’” the opinion said. “To the contrary, the act reflects the legislative intent to protect young persons and other vulnerable populations from the deleterious health effects of tobacco product use.”

The case drew attention in Massachusetts and around the nation and the world and the outcome is likely to prompt more communities to follow Brookline’s lead, creating a patchwork quilt of regulation of tobacco products.

In November, when the court heard arguments in the case, Christopher Banthin of the Public Health Advocacy Institute, who represented Brookline in the proceedings, said the town could have banned tobacco sales altogether but chose not to. Wendlandt suggested a ban was more in keeping with the town’s public health argument, while the decision to ban sales to those born after January 1, 2000 allows everyone born before 2000 to be ”expendable” while those born afterward are “protected by the government.”

Banthin disagreed. “We have learned in public health recently, and tragically, that we’re coming to understand that addiction is a disease,” he said. “It’s not some source of moral judgment. It’s a disease. And so accommodating, not punishing, this group is the appropriate step here. So the hope is that they can be treated through the medical system or quit. But to have someone just stop is problematic, as we know.”