Two California-based nonprofits say a federal court’s decision to block enforcement of SB 343 doesn’t resolve the underlying problem the “Truth in Recycling” law was meant to fix.
Californians Against Waste (CAW) and the National Stewardship Action Council (NSAC) released a joint statement, writing that the July 14 preliminary injunction “temporarily pauses enforcement of SB 343, but it does not change the underlying challenge the law was designed to address: Californians and Americans deserve accurate information about what is and is not recyclable.”
SB 343 prohibits companies from using the chasing-arrows symbol or making recyclability claims on products and packaging unless they meet the state’s collection-and-sorting thresholds. The “60/60” rule requires materials be collected by recycling programs covering 60% of California’s population and sorted by facilities serving 60% of the state’s recycling programs. The law was set to take effect Oct. 4.
US District Judge William Q. Hayes granted the injunction July 14 in California League of Food Producers, et al. v. Bonta, siding with a 20-member coalition of food, packaging and retail trade associations including the California League of Food Producers, Flexible Packaging Association, American Forest & Paper Association and California Grocers Association.
Hayes found four provisions of SB 343 unconstitutionally vague under the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause, and separately ruled the state failed to show under First Amendment scrutiny that the law would “directly advance” its stated goals of reducing consumer confusion and improving recycling rates. The order blocks Bonta from enforcing the law “until further order of the Court.”
The groups said packaging labeled recyclable for decades even when materials weren’t widely accepted, sorted or remade at scale has driven consumer confusion, contamination and declining trust in recycling systems. This is the problem SB 343 aims to address through tying labels to real-world scenarios.
“While we are reviewing the court’s decision and its implications, we continue to believe that claims made on packaging should reflect what actually happens after a material is placed in a recycling bin,” the groups wrote.
The statement frames the ruling as narrow rather than final. “This initial injunction ruling addresses specific legal questions that will continue to be considered through the judicial process,” the groups wrote. “The broader policy question remains unchanged.”
CAW and NSAC said they remain committed to policies that reduce consumer confusion, strengthen recycling systems and hold environmental marketing claims to real-world outcomes. “Accuracy on the label matters,” the groups said. “Consumers deserve truthful information. No company should be allowed to lie on the label.”
The reaction stands in opposition to statements from the plaintiff trade associations that sued to block SB 343, who called the ruling a win for truthful, non-misleading recyclability claims on packaging.
While the injunction is preliminary, it is not a final ruling on SB 343’s constitutionality. Litigation continues before Hayes.
