A federal district court in Oregon has dismissed multiple legal claims in a high-profile challenge to the state’s recycling law, while preserving two constitutional issues for trial and issuing a targeted injunction on enforcement.
The decision affects how the extended producer responsibility (EPR) law — known as the Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act (RMA) — applies to certain industry groups.
Most claims dismissed, but key issues set for July trial
On 6 February 2026, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon granted in part a motion to dismiss in the lawsuit brought by the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW) against the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).
The court rejected a majority of the legal claims raised by NAW, including state constitutional challenges, equal protection claims, and others relating to how the act is administered.
Only two federal constitutional issues remain and will be decided at a trial scheduled to begin on 13 July 2026. These are NAW’s challenges under the Dormant Commerce Clause and the Due Process Clause of the US Constitution, which argue that the EPR law unfairly burdens interstate commerce and lacks adequate procedural safeguards.
Narrow injunction limits enforcement for wholesaler members
Alongside dismissing most claims, the court granted a narrow preliminary injunction that temporarily pauses enforcement of the RMA against NAW and its members.
The injunction prevents the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality from pursuing compliance actions or penalties against those companies while the case proceeds.
Outside the scope of this injunction, the recycling law remains in effect.
Producers of packaging materials, paper products and food serviceware sold in Oregon who are not members of NAW must continue to register, report data and pay required fees to the authorised producer responsibility organisation administering the programme.
Implications for extended producer responsibility programmes
The RMA, enacted in 2021 as part of Oregon’s broader recycling reform, is one of several state-level EPR laws aimed at shifting recycling costs from local government and consumers to producers. Other states with similar frameworks include California, Colorado and Maine.
Legal observers note that how the federal court resolves the constitutional questions could influence how EPR laws are implemented nationwide.
Should challengers succeed on commerce or due process grounds, that could affect the design and enforcement of producer responsibility programmes in other jurisdictions.
The July trial will focus on whether Oregon’s recycling law, as applied, complies with constitutional protections and commerce regulations, and whether its fee and compliance structures place undue burdens on certain producers.
