Manufacturers Score Legal Win Against Unconstitutional Labeling in New Mexico
A New Mexico federal judge issued a preliminary injunction yesterday blocking New Mexico’s sweeping labeling mandate for products made with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, otherwise known as PFAS, from taking effect.
The ruling: Judge Margaret Strickland of the District of New Mexico ruled that the NAM and fellow trade association plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of our claim that the regulation violates the First Amendment’s prohibition against compelled speech.
- In her opinion, Judge Strickland writes that New Mexico failed to “grapple at all with how the required label is a rational vehicle to achieve the goals of protecting consumer and environmental health. … On the surface, the state proclaims the regulation exists to raise consumer awareness, but underneath intends the label to operate as a warning in disguise.”
- The opinion goes on to say, “merely promoting consumer awareness” is not a strong enough interest to “warrant First Amendment intrusions.”
The plaintiffs: The NAM joined the American Chemistry Council, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, the American Coatings Association, the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, the National Federation of Independent Business, the New Mexico Retail Association and the Power Tool Institute in filing the lawsuit.
The NAM says: “Manufacturers welcome the District of New Mexico’s decision blocking this unlawful labeling mandate from taking effect,” said NAM Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary Linda Kelly.
- “The NAM is committed to securing permanent relief to ensure manufacturers aren’t forced to redesign products, packaging and manufacturing lines to accommodate an unconstitutional labeling requirement that imposes tremendous costs on both businesses and consumers.”
