• On May 29, 2026, the Louisiana governor signed HB 717. The bill amends Louisiana food misbranding and mislabeling laws to impose requirements targeting cell-cultured products. Beginning August 1, 2026, all cell-cultured food products sold in Louisiana will need a “clear and conspicuous disclosure” identifying the product in bold print and at least 30-point font.
  • Two other bills concerning cell-cultured food products have made it through the Louisiana legislature and are awaiting the governor’s signature. SB 152 would ban the sale, manufacture, distribution, and advertisement of any cell-cultured food products for human consumption. HB 783 would ban the sale and distribution of fermented dairy products as well as impose labeling requirements on these same products.
  • If the fermented dairy bill is signed, the labeling provisions would immediately go into effect, however the ban on fermented dairy products is contingent on SB 152 being enacted, making the bill legally separable.
  • Louisiana is not the first state to legislate restrictions on the cell-cultured food industry. Mississippi passed a law in April, 2026 that banned cell-cultured milk products in the state. Several states such as Texas and Indiana have imposed more sweeping bans on all cell-cultured protein products.
  • Keller & Heckman will continue monitoring state legislative updates on food labeling and bans.

  • On June 3, 2026, a federal district court in California held a hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction in California League of Food Producers v. Bonta (Case No. 3:26-cv-01675, S.D. Cal.), a lawsuit filed by 21 organizations who contended that California’s SB 343, also known as the Truth in Recycling law, is unconstitutional. The court did not issue a ruling from the bench, and a written opinion is expected.
  • At issue in the lawsuit is whether California’s SB 343 violates the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The law bars any statement or symbol indicating that a product or packaging is recyclable unless the product or packaging meets stringent recycling metrics and other criteria set by the State. Plaintiffs assert that because SB 343 prohibits any symbol or claim – including truthful, qualified claims – it is facially unconstitutional. On April 24, 2026, plaintiffs asked the court to issue a preliminary injunction (PI) to halt the law’s effective date of October 4, 2026, while the case plays out.
  • The Attorney General’s May 18, 2026 opposition to plaintiff’s PI motion reflects an apparent concession that manufacturers whose products do not meet SB 343’s standards could still make some on-pack recyclability claims. The brief suggests that a qualified on-pack claim, such as “Not recyclable in most areas; check locally,” or “a QR code on the package with details regarding the product’s recyclability,” would not violate the law.
  • In their May 26, 2026 response, plaintiffs pointed out that even the AG’s interpretation could leave manufacturers vulnerable in class action litigation. According to plaintiffs, “the AG’s post hoc rationalization in this lawsuit at best merely spotlights the vagueness of the law.”
  • Industry and advocates await the court’s written opinion on plaintiffs’ PI motion, which will hopefully be issued in the coming days. A ruling on the merits of SB 343’s constitutionality will take more time, and a series of appeals is expected. SB 343’s restrictions are of crucial importance to food companies, consumer product companies, and businesses everywhere, and Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor this case closely for the initial ruling.
  • On May 26, 2026, Vermont enacted a baby food testing and labeling law targeting heavy metals. Requirements go into effect January 1, 2027.
  • The bill, H536, requires manufacturers of baby food to test a representative sample from each production aggregate of the manufacturer’s final baby food product for heavy metals, including arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. Testing must be conducted by a proficient laboratory at least once a month.
  • The bill also requires manufacturers to publicly disclose the name and level of each heavy metal in the final baby food product. This disclosure must include sufficient information, such as the product name, universal product code (UPC), lot or batch number, and a link to the FDA website that provides the most recent guidance and information on the health effects of heavy metals on children.
  • If the baby food is tested for a heavy metal subject to an action level or regulatory limit, the manufacturer must add a label stating, in a clear, legible manner, that more information about the heavy metal is available by scanning a QR code. The label must include a QR code directing consumers to the manufacturer’s website with the test results for the heavy metal and a URL linking to the relevant FDA website with the most recent guidance on the health effects of heavy metals on children.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to report on state legislative developments impacting product testing and labeling.
  • On May 28, 2026, the Codex Committee on Food Labeling (CCFL) rejected a proposal aimed at harmonizing the labeling of alcoholic beverages, following member state opposition.
  • The proposal, led by Tanzania, the World Health Organization (WHO), and other African countries, sought to adopt labeling policies aimed to discourage alcohol consumption. by adding provisions clarifying when and how to disclose alcohol content by volume (ABV), how to handle labeling for nutrient content, and how to handle the inclusion of warning labels related to pregnancy and cancer.  Specifically, the proposal recommended provisions that would require the alcohol content by volume (ABV) and nutrient content information of the product to be listed on the label, along with warning language disclosing the health risks associated with pregnancies and cancer.  The proposal also recommended ways to avoid misleading health claims in association with alcoholic beverages (i.e., barring the use of wellness claims, adding criteria to limit the ability to use “low sugar” claims).
  • The Codex Alimentarius is an international standards-setting body that develops global food standards.  While its standards are not binding, countries often use Codex recommendations to shape their national policies.
  • Opposition to the proposal, led by the United States and Mexico, argued that the proposed provisions would “impede trade, create technical challenges for industry, and contribute to consumer confusion.”  Furthermore, the United States asserted that the proposal was an inappropriate use of the Codex by the World Health Organization (WHO) to advance its own Global Alcohol Action Plan 2022-2030, which aims to reduce global alcohol consumption by 20% by 2030.  In the U.S., the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposed similar alcohol labeling policies in January 2025 that were later withdrawn following pushback from the alcohol industry.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor and relay product labeling developments.
  • On May 28, 2026, the FDA Human Foods Program released an updated compliance program manual for its pesticide residue monitoring program. This marks the program’s first update since 2011.
  • These updates will introduce two new monitoring priorities: raw agricultural commodities (RACs) that comprise a large part of U.S. diets, and foods highly consumed by infants and children. The manual notes that sampling should primarily focus on raw foods as opposed to categories like teas, spices, and heavily processed foods.
  • The manual also provides guidance on appropriate laboratories and methods to conduct pesticide residue monitoring. FDA reports that it monitors roughly 3500 samples of domestic and imported foods for over 700 pesticides through this program alone. Additionally, FDA uses Total Diet Study (TDS) to monitor nutrients and contaminants (including pesticides) in U.S. diets.
  • The program is administered by FDA, but it interacts with other programs and agencies. For example, EPA has the authority to set tolerances for specific foods and pesticides, and USDA PDP provides a food pesticide residue database.
  • FDA will enforce the program under the Compliance Policy Guideline, but the manual also references a pending draft revision for enforcement guidance.
  • Keller & Heckman will continue to monitor and report on FDA Human Foods Program developments.
  • On May 27, 2026, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a discussion paper to facilitate stakeholder engagement on potential flexibilities regarding the lot-level tracking requirements in the final rule, “Requirements for Additional Traceability Records for Certain Foods” (Food Traceability Rule).
  • The Food Traceability Rule requires manufacturers that process, pack, or hold foods included on the Food Traceability List (FTL) maintain records containing Key Data Elements (KDEs) associated with specific Critical Tracking Events (CTEs), which are all used to track critical events in the food’s supply chain.
  • The discussion paper contains questions that the FDA would be willing to consider regarding potential flexibilities for satisfying the Food Traceability Rule’s lot-level tracking requirement and is intended to promote deeper and more productive engagements with stakeholders, including the upcoming virtual FDA-led public meeting on June 15.
  • FDA is accepting feedback from interested parties on this discussion paper no later than July 15, 2026, Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0053.  Keller and Heckman would be happy to assist in submitting feedback.
  • On March 14, 2026, West Virginia passed Senate Bill 44, updating the state’s cottage food laws. The bill will allow citizens to obtain a “potentially hazardous cottage food vendor permit,” enabling them to sell these foods without a food establishment permit.
  • Potentially hazardous foods are defined as requiring “time/temperature control or other protocols for safety to limit pathogenic microorganisms or toxin formation.”  Products containing meat, poultry, seafood, or Grade A dairy are still excluded from the law. An applicant for a potentially hazardous cottage food vendor permit may still be subject to conditions like inspections to obtain the permit.
  • The enacted law is significantly pared down from the introduced bill, which had stricter labeling requirements and would have allowed citizens to sell certain meat, poultry, and dairy products. The law will go into effect on June 12, 2026.
  • Keller & Heckman will continue to monitor and report on state food law developments.
  • On May 21, 2026, FDA issued a final guidance for Industry: “Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER) Rat Bioassay Studies to Demonstrate That a New Infant Formula Supports the Quality Factor of Sufficient Biological Quality of Protein” for manufacturers of infant formula and laboratories conducting testing on infant formula.
  • Under FDA’s Current Good Manufacturing Practices (CGMPs) for infant formulas, an infant formula must meet the quality factor of “sufficient biological quality of protein.” 21 CFR 106.96(e). This new final guidance seeks to help manufacturers design, conduct, and evaluate PER studies to meet this requirement. The guidance includes an overview of AOAC Official Method 960.48 and appropriate modifications thereto, as well as guidance on the development of protocols and reports and reference guidelines.
  • A PER study in an animal model permits the determination of a formula’s protein quality and ensures that infants will not be fed a formula with inadequate or biologically unavailable protein.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to report on developments related to infant formula manufacturing.
  • A lawsuit filed last month in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles against Post Consumer Brands, LLC dba Nature’s Recipe alleged that the company falsely and misleadingly advertised its dog food products as “natural” in spite of the fact that their products contained allegedly synthetic ingredients. The Defendant advertised the products with a variety of similar natural claims including “natural ingredients” and “inspired by nature.” The lawsuit also alleged that the brand name “Nature’s Recipe,” along with the “green color schemes, nature-based imagery, and depictions of wholesome ingredients and outdoor environments” gave the impression that the product was composed exclusively of natural ingredients.
  • The complaint contains a list of 45 alleged synthetic ingredients, one or more of which were allegedly included in all of the Defendant’s products. The list consists of mostly vitamins, minerals, and amino acids.
  • Notably the marketing and labeling materials included in the complaint do not explicitly make any representation that the products are 100% natural. Indeed, several of the claims appear to suggest that the products contain non-natural vitamins, minerals, and nutrients (e.g., It’s simply a tasty, natural dog food with added vitamins, minerals, and nutrients”).
  • On May 13, 2026, FDA released two resources to advance the Human Foods Program’s “vision of increased engagement and collaboration with stakeholders to enhance food safety.”
  • The “Food Safety Best Practices for Human Foods” webpage is intended to highlight how FDA can work with industry to develop and implement best practices. The website explains what best practices are, why they are important, and how FDA can assist. In addition, the webpage includes links to examples of working groups and organizations in which FDA has worked to support development of best practices.
  • The “Strengthening Food Safety through Root Cause Analysis” webpage is intended to “strengthen understanding of food safety issues and prevent recurrence.” The webpage explains what a root cause analysis is and why it is important, as well as general best practices for a root cause analysis in the food industry. The webpage also provides examples of FDA’s activities to strengthen root cause analysis processes.
  • An additional FDA development is that Donald Prater, D.V.M., has been selected as the Acting Deputy Commissioner for Human Foods. He will replace Kyle Diamantas, who will be serving as Acting FDA Commissioner, as we previously blogged.
  • Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor and report on developments at FDA.