Federal Court Preliminarily Enjoins PFAS Product-Labeling Mandate
On September 16, 2026, the District of New Mexico preliminarily enjoined enforcement of New Mexico’s per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) product-labeling mandate. Beginning on January 1, 2027, the rule would have required a prominent Erlenmeyer-flask icon containing the word “PFAS” on products with intentionally added PFAS, with comparable disclosures for online and catalog sales.
The court held that industry plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their First Amendment compelled-speech challenge because the state had not shown a sufficient connection between the label and its asserted consumer health and environmental objectives. The injunction remains in force during the litigation.
The decision provides significant near-term relief, but it is not a retreat from New Mexico’s broader PFAS program. New Mexico’s sales restrictions, reporting requirements, testing-related restrictions, and future rulemaking authority remain important compliance considerations.
What Happened?
New Mexico’s 2025 PFAS Protection Act authorizes the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board to adopt implementing regulations, including labeling rules. Beginning on January 1, 2027, the challenged rule required manufacturers to label products containing intentionally added PFAS before sale. The label must be clearly visible and legible.
If a product or package cannot be viewed before purchase, the rule requires a pre-purchase disclosure. Complex durable goods must carry the disclosure in consumer-facing specification sheets and operation and maintenance manuals.
The rule includes exemptions for certain used products, federally regulated pesticides and products, veterinary products, and Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-regulated drugs and medical devices. It also provides mechanisms for alternative labels based on another state’s requirements and for certain waivers.
Its reach is broad: the rule requires labeling for any product with intentionally added PFAS rather than only particular product categories.
The Court’s Analysis
The court rejected the argument that a label identifying PFAS was inherently nonfactual or controversial. It held that the regulation required an identification of a product attribute—not a representation that all PFAS are dangerous, toxic, or environmentally harmful. Nor did the court infer a health warning solely from the flask pictogram.
The rule nevertheless failed at the next stage. Under the commercial-disclosure framework associated with Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, 471 U.S. 626 (1985), the court found that New Mexico had not established a “reasonable fit” between a label that merely identifies PFAS and the state’s interests in protecting consumer health and the environment.
New Mexico had characterized the label as neutral consumer awareness and disavowed that it conveyed risk, exposure, disposal, or avoidance information. In the court’s view, that position severed the necessary connection between the disclosure and the claimed interests.
Who Is Affected?
The injunction directly affects manufacturers, importers, distributors, retailers, and e-commerce businesses selling PFAS-containing products into New Mexico.
It is especially consequential for companies in the consumer product, apparel, textile, furnishing, carpet, furniture, cookware, cosmetic, electronics, durable goods, chemical, and component industries.
Companies with multichannel sales operations should communicate the injunction to product-stewardship, packaging, digital commerce, retailer management, and supply-chain teams.
Why It Matters
The ruling is a meaningful First Amendment constraint on state PFAS labeling rules, but not a categorical prohibition. The court emphasized that another disclosure could be assessed differently if it were factual, noncontroversial, and more directly connected to an identified public health or environmental purpose.
The decision also highlights a core regulatory-design risk: A state may face constitutional vulnerability when it calls a label neutral product information but relies on consumers to treat it as an unstated warning.
The ruling may therefore inform challenges to chemical-content and environmental-impact disclosures that identify a product attribute without explaining the relevant risk or the action consumers are expected to take.
The preliminary injunction does not stop the underlying Act. Beginning January 1, 2027, New Mexico will prohibit sales of specified PFAS-containing products. Beginning January 1, 2028, the state will prohibit additional product categories, subject to exemptions.
The Act also generally requires manufacturers to submit product and PFAS information by January 1, 2027. Beginning in 2028, it restricts sales of products with intentionally added PFAS if required information has not been submitted.
Key Takeaways
The preliminary injunction provides significant near-term relief for companies that would otherwise have been required to implement New Mexico’s PFAS labeling regime before January 1, 2027. But the decision should not be viewed as a broader rollback of state PFAS regulation.
The court’s ruling was directed to the specific labeling requirement and the state’s justification for that disclosure, not New Mexico’s broader restrictions, reporting obligations, or future regulatory authority.
Companies should continue preparing for New Mexico’s PFAS compliance framework while monitoring the litigation. The case may also influence how states craft future chemical-content disclosure requirements and how businesses challenge compelled commercial disclosures that lack a clear connection to the governmental interests they are intended to advance.
Manufacturers, retailers, and other affected businesses should reassess product portfolios, reporting obligations, and upcoming sales restrictions to remain positioned for compliance regardless of the ultimate outcome of the labeling dispute.
If you have any questions, or would like additional information, please contact one of the attorneys on our Environmental, Land Use & Natural Resources team.
You can subscribe to future advisories and other Alston & Bird publications by completing our publications subscription form.