Proposition 65 – Changes That Will Impact the Cannabis Sector
Comment Deadline Approaching: Proposed Amendments Restricting Use of Prop 65 Short-Form Warnings
Cannabis Counsel Cast: Proposed Prop 65 Regulation Would Require Cannabis Products to Warn About Impacts on Child Behavior and Learning
Cannabis Counsel Cast: What Cannabis Companies Need to Know About California’s Prop. 65 (Even if They Aren’t in California)
Doing Business in California, Proposition 65, the California Green Chemical Initiative and the Rigid Plastic Packaging Regulations
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) recently amended its regulations concerning requirements for consumer product warnings to qualify for “safe harbor” protection from enforcement actions...more
California shoppers might be getting more than just a receipt at checkout — they may also be exposed to a toxic chemical, according to Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”) enforcer Center for Environmental Health (CEH) represented by...more
California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”), the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires, among other things, sellers of products to provide a “clear and reasonable warning” if use of the product results...more
Exploring Trends in California’s Proposition 65: Claims, Chemicals, Products, and More - California’s Proposition 65 (“Prop. 65”), the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires, among other things,...more
2023 was a busy year for Prop 65 with the highest number of Notices of Violation since its inception. The California law requires consumers receive warnings regarding the presence of chemicals that cause cancer or...more
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are present in a variety of consumer products. PFAS have been increasingly targeted in laws and regulations and have served as a hotbed for class action lawsuits, particularly in...more
California’s regulatory framework for cannabis and hemp-derived products, including CBD, continues to evolve, most recently via updated Proposition 65 warning requirements that came into full effect Jan. 3, 2021. As of that...more
New Proposition 65 warning requirements applicable to cannabis and CBD products took effect on January 3, 2021, after a one-year enforcement grace period. Companies who manufacture, distribute, or sell at retail THC products...more
A comprehensive guide to the latest developments affecting non-prescription drug products under Monograph Reform. American Conference Institute’s Advanced Legal, Regulatory and Compliance Forum on Over-the-Counter Drugs will...more
Last month, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) proposed amendments to clarify Proposition 65 reproductive toxicity sampling requirements for food products. California’s Proposition 65, also known as...more
For the past eight years, a collection of coffee brewers and retailers have been embroiled in a legal battle with Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT) over whether certain coffee products sold in California...more
On October, 5, 2017, Governor Brown announced that he signed AB 1583 into law. AB 1583, authored by Assemblymember Ed Chau, a democrat from Monterey Park, is intended to promote transparency in Proposition 65 private...more
Proposition 65, known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, among other things requires businesses employing ten or more people to warn consumers if the business’ products contain a chemical...more
We are thrilled to bring you the third installment of Stinson Leonard Street's Emerging Trends newsletter. We are proud of the depth and breadth of experience and knowledge across our firm's 13 offices nationwide and are...more
Last month, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (“OEHHA”) adopted new Proposition 65 warning regulations. Much of the discussions regarding these new regulations have centered on the warning...more
On April 28, 2015, the Environmental Law Foundation (“ELF”) filed a petition in the California Supreme Court for review of the Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Environmental Law Foundation v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp., et...more