Extended Producer Responsibility Laws Challenged in Court Across the United States
On June 23, 2026, 17 states, joined by the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW), filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging California’s plastic packaging Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation.
The coalition of states, led by Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, brought the lawsuit against California’s 2022 Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act. The group challenging California’s implementation of EPR argues that the breadth of the legislation extends beyond California and raises constitutional concerns, including separation of powers and due process.
Although this is the largest challenge to date, it is not the only lawsuit involving EPR programs across the country.
What Are EPR Programs?
Extended Producer Responsibility programs shift the cost of collecting and recycling packaging from taxpayers to producers. Under these programs, producers are charged fees for packaging that contains certain materials covered by the law.
In most states, these fees are set by a Producer Responsibility Organization, or PRO. These organizations are typically nonprofits created to manage fee collection and track packaging production. PROs are often made up of industry representatives who design and approve fee schedules, which are then reviewed or approved by state agencies.
EPR Laws Are Expanding Across the Country
In addition to California, six other states have passed EPR programs and are in various stages of implementation:
- Maine
- Oregon
- Colorado
- Minnesota
- Maryland
- Washington
Several other states are currently considering similar legislation.
NAW, which joined the California lawsuit, has also sued Oregon over the constitutionality of that state’s EPR program. In that case, NAW alleges similar constitutional violations, including claims that allowing a non-governmental Producer Responsibility Organization to assess fees violates due process.
The federal district court in Oregon issued a preliminary injunction blocking the assessment of fees on parties involved in the lawsuit until the case is decided. A similar case is also pending in Colorado.
What This Means for Pennsylvania Businesses
Pennsylvania has not enacted a broad EPR program for plastic packaging. The most recent attempt was Pennsylvania House Bill 1873 in 2022, which would have established an EPR program for plastic and paper packaging materials.
Pennsylvania currently has an EPR-like program that requires manufacturers of electronics to provide and fund recycling programs for their products. However, there are no recent attempts to implement a broad packaging EPR program within the state.
Even without a Pennsylvania plastic packaging EPR law, Pennsylvania companies may still be affected. Businesses that produce plastic packaging or sell packaged products into states with EPR legislation may need to comply with those states’ requirements.
Key Takeaway
EPR laws are expanding, and legal challenges are now being heard in several jurisdictions. Businesses that manufacture, distribute, or sell products using covered packaging materials should monitor these developments closely and evaluate whether they may have compliance, reporting, or fee obligations in states with active EPR programs.
For guidance on how Extended Producer Responsibility statutes and litigation may affect your operations, compliance programs, or reporting obligations, please contact our office at 814-870-7600 to speak with a member of our environmental law team.
Legal Advice Disclaimer: The information presented on this website serves solely as general guidance and should not be construed as legal advice by MacDonald, Illig, Jones & Britton LLP as a replacement for seeking personalized legal counsel from a qualified attorney. MacDonald, Illig, Jones & Britton LLP does not assume liability for the accuracy or reliability of content hosted on any third-party websites accessible through links provided on this site.