17 Republican AGs Sue California Over SB 54 as EPR Plan Tops $17.2 Billion
Updated
Updated · Packaging Dive · Jun 22
17 Republican AGs Sue California Over SB 54 as EPR Plan Tops $17.2 Billion
3 articles · Updated · Packaging Dive · Jun 22
Summary
A 17-state Republican coalition led by Nebraska filed a federal lawsuit Monday seeking to block California’s SB 54 packaging EPR law while the case proceeds; the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors joined as the sole business plaintiff.
The complaint says SB 54 unlawfully burdens interstate commerce and violates U.S. and California constitutional protections, targeting CalRecycle and Circular Action Alliance over fee-setting powers plaintiffs say were delegated to a private group with limited court review.
CAA’s draft program plan, released a week earlier, projected a 2027 budget of up to $1.87 billion and as much as $17.2 billion over five years; CAA and CalRecycle said implementation will continue during the litigation.
The suit extends NAW’s broader legal push against packaging EPR laws after it won a preliminary injunction in Oregon, where a five-day trial over that state’s law is set to begin July 13.
SB 54 is also under separate challenge from environmental groups that say California’s May regulations weakened the law, which requires producers by 2032 to cut single-use plastic packaging 25% and recycle 65%.
As lawsuits mount, can California's pioneering multi-billion dollar recycling law survive its constitutional challenges?
Who truly pays for California's recycling overhaul: corporate polluters or everyday consumers?
Are state-by-state recycling laws doomed to legal failure, requiring a single federal standard?
$32 Billion at Stake: California’s SB 54 Faces Multi-State Legal Showdown Over Plastic Packaging Law
Overview
On June 22, 2026, seventeen states and the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors sued California to block Senate Bill 54, a law regulating plastic packaging. The lawsuit argues that California is trying to impose its own policies nationwide and criticizes the state for giving too much power to the Circular Action Alliance, a private group that sets confidential fees for producers. Businesses affected by these fees cannot challenge them in court, raising concerns about fairness and oversight. This legal challenge highlights the tension between state authority, business interests, and the push for stronger environmental regulations.