A federal judge has rejected a constitutional challenge to Oregon's Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act (RMA), allowing the state's packaging extended producer responsibility (EPR) program to continue.
The ruling marks one of the first federal court decisions to examine the legality of a US packaging EPR program as similar laws are rolled out in states across the country.
Oregon's EPR law, which was passed in 2021, requires producers of packaging, paper products and food serviceware to help finance the collection, sorting and recycling of those materials. Producers must report covered materials sold into Oregon and pay fees that support the state's recycling system. Circular Action Alliance (CAA) administers the program and oversees producer compliance.
The National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW) filed suit against Oregon in 2025, arguing the law placed a burden on interstate commerce, imposed unreasonable costs on businesses, and granted too much authority to CAA. In a decision issued on 27 August, US District Judge Michael H. Simon dismissed those claims, finding the program does not violate constitutional protections governing interstate commerce or due process.
Simon wrote that Oregon has been at the forefront of recycling policy development and found the state had a legitimate interest in addressing packaging waste through the EPR program.
The court also rejected NAW's objections to exemptions available to government entities and certain smaller businesses, finding insufficient evidence that the provisions favored Oregon companies over out-of-state firms.
NAW additionally argued that producer fees collected under the program were excessive. The association pointed to CAA financial data showing the organization collected more in fees than it spent during 2025. Simon disagreed, finding the difference reflected funds being set aside as the program expands rather than evidence of an unlawful fee structure.
The ruling further found that producers are not required to participate through CAA alone because Oregon law allows the formation of alternative producer responsibility organizations and provides other compliance options.
Simon also determined the law includes sufficient procedural safeguards. Producers facing enforcement actions are entitled to notice, opportunities to correct violations, administrative review and judicial appeal before penalties become final.
The decision allows Oregon's EPR program to continue moving forward as covered producers remain subject to reporting and fee obligations under the law. Producers that fail to comply may face civil penalties of up to $25,000/day, and Oregon regulators may prohibit the sale of covered products in the state until violations are resolved.
The ruling comes as NAW continues to challenge packaging EPR laws in other states. The trade association filed lawsuits against California's EPR law in June and Colorado's Producer Responsibility Program for Statewide Recycling Act in July, raising similar concerns over fee-setting authority, producer obligations and interstate commerce.
