On July 31, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, affirmed the dismissal of a Proposition 65 enforcement action in Consumer Protection Group, LLC v. Signal Brands, LLC, holding that a prior consent judgment entered in a separate private enforcement action barred the subsequent suit under res judicata.
On July 22, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the state agency responsible for implementing and administering Proposition 65 enforcement, released draft amendments to the Proposition 65 warning regulations as part of its “Omnibus 2026” pre-rulemaking process.
As in 2025, the first few months of 2026 have seen fashion and retail companies operating in an environment where legal developments increasingly shape day-to-day business decisions, and the same is expected to continue throughout the rest of the year.
Consumer Products Industry Group co-leader, Lynn R. Fiorentino, presented at the 2025 American Conference Institute (ACI) Legal, Regulatory, and Compliance Forum on Cosmetics & Personal Care Products West Coast Edition.
On August 22, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) issued a proposed rule establishing a new Proposition 65 no-significant-risk level (NSRL) for diethanolamine (DEA), first listed for cancer in 2012.
In an order filed on August 12, the US District Court for the Eastern District of California ruled that California’s Proposition 65 cancer warning requirement for certain listed forms of titanium dioxide (airborne, unbound particles of respirable size) in cosmetics and personal care products is unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
According to an anonymous US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) employee, the agency is considering whether to propose a rule that would require the agency to reevaluate the health and environmental risks of certain chemicals, including per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
On December 6, 2024, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, the lead agency that implements Proposition 65, announced new amendments to the Proposition 65 “short-form” warning requirements.
California’s Proposition 65 requires businesses to provide warnings to California consumers about significant exposures to chemicals it has determined to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm when exposure to the chemicals exceeds an established safe harbor level in a consumer product.
After three years of various proposals, on December 6, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the lead agency that implements Proposition 65, finally announced new amendments to “short-form” warning requirements. These amendments have been long anticipated, as OEHHA’s several prior proposals to modify the short-form warnings were unsuccessful.