Across the United States, state legislatures are increasingly active in regulating food ingredients. According to one estimate, more than 30 states introduced almost 120 pieces of legislation aimed at food additives in 2025 alone. These efforts reflect growing interest in the Make America Health Again (“MAHA”) initiatives, with states often referencing the MAHA movement when evaluating these laws.
States have taken or attempted a number of different approaches to food ingredients, which include outright bans of certain ingredients (either across all foods or limited to foods sold in schools), warning or disclosure statements, and Generally Recognized As Safe (“GRAS”) notifications.
Ingredient Bans
Several states have passed ingredient bans, predominantly (though not exclusively) focused on food colors, including California, Arkansas, and West Virginia. Beyond these bans for all foods sold within the states, many states have passed ingredient bans for food sold in schools.
Notably, the West Virginia ban was challenged in a lawsuit, with the International Association of Color Manufacturers (IACM) claiming that the ban is unconstitutional. Though this litigation is ongoing, a federal judge issued a temporary injunction, temporarily blocking enforcement of the bans, because the statute unconstitutionally vague because the statute simply bans “poisonous and injurious” additives, without defining how this will be evaluated.
Ingredient Warning Label Laws
Two states have enacted broad warning label requirements that apply to packaged foods sold within their borders. A number of other states have introduced similar laws, though only Texas and Louisiana have passed such laws.
Texas
Texas passed Senate Bill 25, which will require warning labels on foods containing any of 44 named ingredients. These include artificial colors, preservatives, emulsifiers, and many other types of additives. SB 25 requires that food products sold in Texas with any of the listed ingredients carry a warning label stating the ingredient is “not recommended for human consumption by the appropriate authority in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom.” The law applies to any labels that are created or updated on or after January 1, 2027.
In late 2025, a lawsuit was filed challenging the constitutionality of SB 25. This litigation is currently ongoing, and is unlikely to be resolved ahead of the January 1, 2027 effective date for SB 25.
Louisiana
Louisiana also passed a similar law, Senate Bill 14, effective Jan. 1, 2028. Rather than text warnings printed on the front of packaging, manufacturers must include a QR code linking to ingredient-specific disclosures, along with a notice that the product contains a listed ingredient. The list of ingredients targeted in SB14 differs from Texas’s list, but similarly focuses on preservatives, artificial colors, and similar additives.
GRAS Notifications
Several U.S. states have recently proposed laws that would require manufacturers to notify or report to state authorities when they rely on a self-affirmed GRAS determination for food ingredients sold in the state. Although FDA operates a voluntary GRAS notification program, participation is not mandatory, prompting states to pursue transparency-focused measures. Currently, no state has passed a GRAS notification requirement, but legislative activity remains active and expanding.
State legislatures across the U.S. are clearly stepping into areas where federal food regulation has been limited or slow to change, pushing the MAHA movement forward through the states. From mandatory warning labels on products with certain additives to growing scrutiny of ultra-processed foods, these laws reflect shifting priorities in food policy and public health. We are carefully tracking these state initiatives, legal challenges to these laws, and assisting with compliance strategies.