Latest / Eccentric Laws & Social Oddities / Episode 17- Don’t Mess with Bologna: The U.S. Law That Defines a Sandwich
Transcript
- Juris Oddity: Welcome to Eccentric Laws & Social Oddities, the podcast where we chew on some of the weirdest rules humanity has ever created. I’m your host, Juris Oddity, and today’s episode is a real mouthful. We’re biting into a law that sparked genuine legal debate in the United States: the question of whether a burrito counts as a sandwich—and how that debate led to actual legislation defining, of all things, what a sandwich is. Juris Oddity: Let’s set the table. In 2006, a Panera Bread franchise in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts, found itself in a heated dispute with a shopping center landlord. Panera had signed a lease that included a non-compete clause, which prohibited the landlord from renting to any other restaurant that sold "sandwiches." Enter Qdoba Mexican Grill. When the landlord offered a lease to Qdoba, Panera cried foul. Juris Oddity: According to Panera, Qdoba’s burritos and tacos violated their sandwich exclusivity. But the landlord argued that Mexican food didn’t count. Cue the lawyers. And yes, this went to court. Juris Oddity: A Massachusetts judge was forced to do something no law student could ever prepare for: legally define the word "sandwich." After testimony from culinary experts, dictionary citations, and a truly surreal amount of legal paperwork, the judge ruled that a burrito is not a sandwich. The key distinction? A sandwich, the court found, involves at least two slices of bread with filling in between. A burrito, by contrast, is a single tortilla wrapped around its contents. Juris Oddity: This wasn’t just a foodie argument. The decision had real consequences for lease enforcement, zoning permissions, and even tax classification. You see, once you legally define a sandwich, you open the door to regulating other food categories. If a burrito isn’t a sandwich, what about a hot dog? A calzone? A pita wrap? Is a hamburger a sandwich? The legal system, once it took a bite, had to finish the whole meal. Juris Oddity: And this wasn’t just a one-time event. In 2018, New York state tax officials were asked to determine whether a toasted bagel with cream cheese was a sandwich, subject to a different sales tax than a plain bagel. Their answer? Yes, it was—and it meant a higher tax rate. In California, similar rulings applied to wraps and hoagies, affecting how businesses reported food sales. Juris Oddity: But the real kicker? Several U.S. states now have official definitions of a sandwich in their tax codes. Some explicitly list what counts, from paninis to club sandwiches. Others take a broader approach. In one Ohio county zoning ordinance, a "sandwich" was defined as "any food product generally recognized as being prepared by placing meat, cheese, or other fillings between bread or bread-like substances." That includes wraps, flatbreads, and, yes, possibly even burritos—depending on interpretation. Juris Oddity: Of course, the eccentricity here isn’t just the law—it’s what the law says about us. Why does it matter what a sandwich is? Because the moment you put boundaries on a definition, everything on the edge becomes a problem. Business contracts, tax rates, school lunch standards, airport security regulations—all can hinge on how we classify our food. Juris Oddity: In fact, some food vendors have used these laws to their advantage. Want to bypass a licensing restriction? Just argue that your open-faced rye creation isn’t technically a sandwich. Want to be excluded from a sandwich tax? Call your item a “wrap” instead. When legal definitions meet marketing creativity, the results can be hilarious—and costly. Juris Oddity: This brings us to the deeper point: the law, even when applied to something as seemingly silly as a sandwich, reveals how power and classification work. Who gets to define the terms? Who benefits from a narrow definition, and who profits from keeping it vague? When Panera sued over burritos, it wasn’t about bread—it was about market protection, competition, and corporate strategy. Juris Oddity: And there’s a certain beauty in that. Because while the law can seem distant and dry, every once in a while it touches our lunch trays and makes us question the rules we take for granted. A sandwich, after all, is something we think we understand—until a judge, a contract, or a tax code tells us otherwise. Juris Oddity: So the next time you sit down with your favorite sub, hoagie, wrap, or roll, remember that what you’re eating might not just be lunch. It might be a legally significant foodstuff whose identity has been debated in courtrooms and council chambers alike. Juris Oddity: That’s all for today’s stacked and sliced edition of Eccentric Laws & Social Oddities. Join me next time as we uncover another regulation that seems hard to digest—until you chew on the details. Until then, I’m Juris Oddity, reminding you to stay curious, stay quirky, and always read the fine print—even on the menu.