A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
A coalition of farming, forestry, restaurant and packaging organizations are suing California over its Truth in Recycling law, arguing it violates their right to free speech.
The industry trade groups, which include the Dairy Institute of California, the Flexible Packaging Assn. and the Western Growers Assn., filed their suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Tuesday.
They argue that Senate Bill 343, which governs the use of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol in California, operates as “government-imposed censorship,” according to a news release issued by a public affairs firm contracted by the group. The California law says only truly recyclable products may carry the label.
The businesses say only when “the material satisfies rigid and arbitrary regulatory criteria set by the state” are they able to inform consumers their packaging is recyclable.
They are also seeking a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the law while the challenge proceeds through the court.
“SB 343 forces dairy product manufacturers to remove vital recycling guidance from the very cartons Californians rely on every day,” said Dairy Institute of California Executive Director Katie Davey, in the statement. “This law ignores the reality of our recycling infrastructure and unconstitutionally restricts our right to provide transparent recycling instructions to consumers. We are seeking to stop this policy before it leads to more waste and disrupts our ability to deliver milk to California families and schools.”
The bill was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 and went into effect in 2025. It prohibits manufacturers from using a “chasing arrows” symbol on products or materials that aren’t actually being recycled in any meaningful way in California.
In January, CalRecycle, the state’s waste agency, issued a report showing that most single-use plastic materials in the state’s waste stream were being recycled at levels below 10%.
Even yogurt containers and margarine tubs — made of some of the most common plastic packaging materials, such as polypropylene — are being recycled at a rate of only 2% in the state, the report said. Only 5% of colored shampoo and detergent bottles, made from polyethylene, or #1 plastic, are getting recycled.
Reports on abysmally low rates of recycling for milk cartons and polystyrene had been widely shared even before that.
“Why would lying to consumers be protected speech under the 1st Amendment?” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for Californians Against Waste. “The courts have repeatedly said that the government can regulate environmental claims to require honesty, and I don’t see how this would be any different.”
Plastic materials that can’t be recycled are typically sent to landfills or sometimes shipped illegally overseas, where they are burned or end up in landfills, rivers and waterways there.
A report by the Natural Resources Defense Council shows that nationwide, taxpayers, governments and businesses are spending between $9.8 billion and $13.3 billion per year cleaning up plastic litter, and almost $3 billion is spent by local governments on landfilling plastic.
According to one state analysis, 2.9 million tons of single-use plastic and 171.4 billion single-use plastic components were sold, offered for sale or distributed in California in 2023.
Single-use plastics, and plastic waste more broadly, are considered a growing environmental and health problem. In recent decades, plastic waste has overwhelmed waterways and oceans, sickening marine life and threatening human health.
“The data has been clear for a long time now: Many products claimed to be ‘recyclable’ are not actually recyclable under real world conditions,” said Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), who authored the Truth in Recycling bill.
