What’s Happening with Warnings on Texas Food Labels?

In 2025, Texas became the first state in the U.S. to enact a labeling mandate for foods containing any of 44 specified ingredients as part of Senate Bill 25 (SB 25), the Make Texas Healthy Again Act. To recap, SB 25 requires that labels updated after January 1, 2027 for foods containing any of the specified ingredients feature the following:

What Is the Status of SB 25’s Warning Label Requirement?

SB 25 is still currently effective and applies to any food label developed or copyrighted on or after January 1, 2027, but litigation has ensued—which, before passage, the bill author’s office told us was certain to follow SB 25’s enactment—so successful implementation of SB 25 by the state is far from assured.

On December 5, 2025, four food and beverage trade associations representing a broad swath of industry filed suit in the Western District of Texas to challenge the warning label requirement of SB 25.¹

In their filing, the American Beverage Association, Consumer Brands Association, National Confectioners Association and Food Marketplace, Inc. d/b/a the Food Industry Association (FMI) allege that Texas’ SB 25 warning requirement is a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as the Commerce Clause, and that it is preempted by federal law.² The trade groups have argued that the warning requirement:

• Violates the First Amendment by compelling speech that is false and misleading because all of the foreign governments referenced in the scripted warning statement do not explicitly prohibit the ingredient(s) listed nor categorize them as “not recommended for human consumption”³
• Is preempted by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), including the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA)⁴
• Is vague and does not provide adequate due process under the Fourteenth Amendment because some of the language is undefined and may be open to various interpretations by manufacturers⁵
• Violates the Dormant Commerce Clause by imposing requirements on manufacturers and distributors that are located outside of the state⁷

The plaintiffs seek both declaratory and equitable relief, including an injunction barring enforcement.⁸

Following their complaint, the plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction, asserting that “it’s particularly evident that plaintiffs are substantially likely to prevail in their First Amendment challenge” because SB 25’s warning requirement is not narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling governmental interest.⁸ Texas Attorney General Paxton has maintained that the required “WARNING” is simply to alert Texas consumers to the presence of ingredients that consumers may find objectionable so they can make their own informed choices.⁹ The plaintiffs’ motion remains pending with an initial pretrial conference scheduled for February 25, 2026.¹⁰

Has Texas Provided a Proposed Rule for Implementation of SB 25?

During the fall of 2025, prior to the industry challenge, the state began planning for implementation of SB 25’s warning label requirement. On September 26, 2025, the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, on behalf of the Texas Department of State Health Services, proposed to amend Title 25 of the Texas Administrative Code to adopt Subchapter II, Sections 229.1001 through 229.1005, concerning Warning Label Requirements for Food.¹¹ The requirements would apply to:¹²

• Any manufacturer that offers a food product for sale in Texas, no matter where the food product was originally made
• Any ingredient meant to be consumed by humans, which the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires to be listed on the food label
• Food product labels developed or copyrighted on or after January 1, 2027

While most of the proposed rule reiterates the requirements previously stated in SB 25, the proposal goes further in defining a “food manufacturer” to include a private label brand owner. Specifically, the proposal defines a “food manufacturer” as the entity responsible for ensuring that the food product label includes the warning statement and “[a] person who combines, purifies, processes or packages food to sell through a wholesale outlet[,]” including “a retail outlet that packages or labels food before selling it” and “a person responsible for the purity and proper labeling of a food item by labeling the food with the person’s name and address.”¹³

The proposed rule also clarifies how food manufacturers and retailers who sell their products online may comply with the warning requirement, including, for example:¹⁴

• Posting a legible statement on the manufacturer’s or retailer’s website on which the product is offered for sale
• Posting pictures of the entire food product label, including the warning label, on the website
• Providing the information to the consumer in other ways

The agency accepted comments on the rule during the fall.¹⁵