Food Industry Groups Challenge Texas Law Requiring Warning Labels For Certain Food Ingredients

A Make America Healthy Again (MAHA)-inspired state law mandating that food containing any of 44 ingredients bear a label with the above statement, is now the subject of a federal district court challenge. A group of food industry associations filed suit on December 5, 2025, challenging Texas Senate Bill 25, also known as the "Make Texas Healthy Again Act" (Texas Health & Safety Code § 431.0815). The associations—the American Beverage Association, Consumer Brands Association, National Confectioners Association, and Food Industry Association (FMI)—challenge the law's constitutionality, asserting that Section 9, which requires warnings for certain food ingredients, violates the First Amendment and is preempted by federal law. See American Beverage Association et al. v. Paxton, No. 6:25-cv-00566, (W.D. Tex., Dec. 5, 2025).

Section 9 of the Act requires packaging for food that contains one or more of 44 ingredients to include that warning label if (1) the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) "requires the ingredient to be named on a food label" and (2) "the ingredient is used in a product intended for human consumption." The warning requirement would apply to new food product labels developed or copyrighted after January 1, 2027. The law provides for civil penalties of up to $50,000 per day for each distinct food product and, potentially, criminal penalties. See our previous alerts here and here.

The lawsuit seeks to invalidate Section 9 as an impermissible content-based regulation of speech because the warning requirement compels businesses to "convey a government-scripted message on food labels and online" without furthering any government interest. The groups also assert that the warning is inaccurate and misleading.

Additionally, the groups claim that Section 9 is preempted because FDA already regulates the target ingredients. The additional warning, the groups argue, frustrates the uniform standards for the required information displayed on food labels set by federal food-labeling laws, such as the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA).

According to the plaintiffs, Section 9 is also unconstitutionally vague because it fails to properly define the conditions under which it is preempted by federal law. As a result, the groups claim that businesses will have no way of knowing whether their members' products are subject to Section 9 or federal labeling requirements. Lastly, the groups argue that Section 9 violates the dormant Commerce Clause because businesses will be forced to change their products or labels nationwide to meet the requirements imposed by the Texas law.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Pacific Legal Foundation, and the Goldwater Institute have filed amicus briefs in support of the plaintiffs.

On December 12, 2025, the plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction, asking the court to pause the enforcement of Section 9 until the courts resolve the groups' challenge. The motion largely repeats the arguments of the December 5 complaint, asserting that the Section 9-imposed warnings are inaccurate and not triggered by any determination made by a Texas- or U.S.-based authority but rather by policy judgments made by foreign jurisdictions. The groups argue they will suffer irreparable harm from the First Amendment violation as well as from the costs their members will likely incur by changing labeling on their products and websites to comply with the Act. Texas filed its opposition to that motion on December 29.

Takeaways

A decision on the preliminary injunction is expected in the first quarter of 2026. Until a decision is reached, food companies should continue to identify which ingredients may trigger preemption under relevant federal labeling requirements or other relevant U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) or FDA actions for each separate chemical.

Food companies should also continue to monitor Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) developments and look for additional opportunities to provide comments on the upcoming regulations. DSHS has already begun the rulemaking process to enforce the Act. It published proposed rules on September 26, 2025, listing the food ingredients that require a warning label and the requirements for the warning label. 50 Tex. Reg. 6301. The proposed rule includes the statutory exemptions: certain ingredients; foods produced in a restaurant or retail food establishment; products regulated by USDA, or labeled with a governmental warning with a recommendation from the surgeon general of the United States Public Health Service; drugs; dietary supplements; a pesticide chemical, soil or plant nutrient, or other agricultural chemical used in the production, storage, or transportation of a raw agricultural commodity; and exemptions related to a specific ingredient for food and color additive listed in the Health and Safety Code. The public may still comment on the proposed rule or request a public hearing. Tex. Gov't Code § 2001.029. If the proposed rule is not adopted by March 26, 2026, it is considered withdrawn as a matter of law. Tex. Gov't Code § 2001.027

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.