Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-Dancheva

On August 27, 2026, after a 5-day bench trial, U.S. District Judge Michael H. Simon upheld in its entirety Oregon’s Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act (RMA), the state’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) law, reversing an earlier preliminary injunction that captured stakeholder attention. This is the first federal court decision upholding a packaging EPR law against constitutional arguments and may have implications for other similar lawsuits challenging EPR and other laws on constitutional grounds, including the ongoing litigation in California concerning SB 343.

Read more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-DanchevaPhoto of Anushka R. Stein

On July 14, 2026, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted a request for a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of SB 343, also known as California’s “Truth in Recycling” law. Restrictions on recyclability claims were set to take effect on October 4, 2026, for products or packaging manufactured after that date that do not meet the recyclability criteria set out under the law. The court ordered that “Defendant Rob Bonta, and all those in privity or acting in concert with Defendant Bonta, are hereby enjoined from enforcing SB 343 until further order of the Court.” The state’s enforcement of the law’s restrictions is now indefinitely delayed.

Read more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-DanchevaPhoto of Anushka R. Stein

Following a sweep of enforcement actions and closing letters related to “Made in the USA” (MUSA) claims earlier this year, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or the Commission) continues its focus on these claims with recent warning letters to seven companies. On July 6, 2026, the FTC announced that it had issued warning letters to companies that marketed their products as American-made. Like the FTC’s MUSA sweep in April, the recent warning letters are linked to the Administration’s March 13, 2026 Executive Order (EO), “Ensuring Truthful Advertising of Products Claiming to be Made in America,” which directed the Commission to prioritize enforcement of fraudulent MUSA claims “wherever appropriate.”

Read more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-DanchevaPhoto of Anushka R. Stein

On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States (the Court) struck down Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, the nearly century-old precedent that restricted presidential authority to fire independent agency officers at will. The Court’s decision in Trump v. Slaughter, in which a former Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) challenged the president’s authority to fire her, means that cases involving Trump’s at-will firings at some other federal agencies are likely to come out in the president’s favor—including his firing of leadership at the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), among others. 

Read more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-Dancheva

On June 25, 2026, Lollicup USA, a manufacturer of single-use disposable products for the restaurant and food services industries, filed in federal district court a putative class action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Oregon’s Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act, SB 582 (the Act or RMA). Like several other state laws, the RMA establishes extended producer responsibility (EPR) requirements for packaging products sold into or in the state. This is the second lawsuit challenging the RMA’s constitutionality, joining a growing tide of litigation challenging the constitutionality of state EPR laws.

Read more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Anushka R. Stein

On June 22, 2026, a coalition of 17 states led by Nebraska’s attorney general (AG) plus the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW), filed a federal lawsuit in the Eastern District of California, challenging the constitutionality of SB 54 (or the Act), California’s extended producer responsibility (EPR) law for packaging. Defendants include the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), that agency’s head, and the Circular Action Alliance (CAA), the Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) selected by California to implement SB 54. Notably, NAW filed a similar lawsuit last year against Oregon’s EPR law.

This litigation follows a more narrowly focused lawsuit filed in the San Francisco Superior Court on June 2, 2026, by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Californians Against Waste (CAW) Foundation, and Oceana, against CalRecycle and the agency’s head.

Read more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-Dancheva

Producers covered under California’s Responsible Textile Recovery Act of 2024 (SB 707, RTRA, or Act) have until July 1, 2026, to register with Landbell USA, the producer responsibility organization (PRO) appointed by the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to manage the extended producer responsibility (EPR) program established under the Act. On February 27, 2026, CalRecycle approved Landbell USA, part of the Landbell Group of Germany, as the PRO for managing textile producer obligations. A legal challenge of the PRO appointment has been filed, and a hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction is set for August 7, 2026, but the July 1 registration deadline remains.

Read the more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-Dancheva

On June 3, 2026, a federal district court in California held a hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction in a legal challenge filed by 21 organizations contending that California’s SB 343, also known as the Truth in Recycling law, is unconstitutional. At issue in California League of Food Producers v. Bonta (Case No. 3:26-cv-01675, S.D. Cal.) is whether the exacting requirements of SB 343 on recyclable claims – including bans on the traditional “triangle of arrows” design of the plastic Resin Identification Code (RIC) – violate free speech and due process. The court did not issue a ruling from the bench, and a written opinion is expected.

Read more here.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Anushka R. Stein

The registration deadline for businesses covered under California’s Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act (SB 54) is fast approaching. On May 1, 2026, the final regulations for the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program established by the Act became effective; a copy of the final regulations has not yet been posted. Producers now have until June 1, 2026, to register with the Circular Action Alliance, the designated producer responsibility organization (PRO) for California. Companies who wish to comply individually, and small businesses seeking exemptions, must register with and apply to CalRecycle by June 1.

More resources are available at CalRecycle’s Producer Guidance website.

Photo of Sheila MillarPhoto of Antonia Stamenova-DanchevaPhoto of Anushka R. Stein

On April 14, following last month’s Executive Order (EO) directing the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Agency) to prioritize enforcement of fraudulent “Made in the U.S.A.” (MUSA) claims, the FTC announced three new MUSA enforcement actions involving four companies. Read the update here.