EnviroPolitics Blog

Greenwashing litigation on the rise

By J. Randall Boyer, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP in the National Law Review

In today’s hyper-marketed economy, buzzwords like “natural,” “eco-friendly,” and “sustainably sourced,” are appearing increasingly on consumer goods. As a result, the Plaintiffs bar is taking aim at allegedly false marketing statements that products are good for the planet (or at least better for it than competing products) – so-called “greenwashing” litigation.

This rise in litigation is more than just a legal trend—it’s a reflection of changing consumer expectations, evolving regulatory frameworks, and heightened accountability in the era of environmental, social, and governance marketing. In this post, we’ll highlight key greenwashing cases we are watching and discuss what companies and marketers need to know to avoid being part of this growing legal trend.

What is “Greenwashing?”

Greenwashing is conveying a misleading impression that a company, product, or service is environmentally friendly, through marketing, branding, or public statements. The practice seeks to capitalize on consumer demand for environmentally responsible choices. Greenwashing litigation typically involves allegations that companies were able to charge higher prices through vague, exaggerated, or unsubstantiated environmental claims in marketing materials.

Current Cases

We are watching several cases that are reflective of this new trend. These cases highlight the types of claims that are becoming increasingly popular.

Dib et al. v. Apple Inc., Case No. 5:25-cv-02043 (N.D. Cal., filed February 26, 2025) – Plaintiffs assert that Apple’s claim of carbon neutrality for its Apple Watch Series 9, SE, and Ultra 2 models is deceptive because the projects used for carbon offsets would have occurred regardless of Apple’s involvement. Plaintiffs claim that advertised offsets must represent real, incremental environmental benefits.
Lowry et al. v. Proctor & Gamble Co., Case No. 2:25-cv-00897(S.D. Ohio, filed January 16, 2025) – Plaintiffs allege practices like clear-cutting contradict Procter & Gamble’s claim that Charmin toilet paper uses paper pulp sourced through environmentally responsible forest management. Plaintiff asserts that use of the Forest Stewardship Council and Rainforest Alliance logos mislead consumers.
Merrell v. Florida Crystals Corporation et al., Case No. 5:25-cv-02264 (N.D. Cal., filed March 5, 2025) – Plaintiff alleges that defendant sugar companies reportedly use pre‑harvest burning while implying ecological responsibility and branding themselves as climate-conscious. Plaintiff objects to the “Farming to Help Save the Planet” tagline.[1]

Read the full article

If you like this post, you’ll love our daily environmental newsletter, EnviroPolitics. It’s packed daily with the latest news, commentary, and legislative updates from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware…and beyond. Don’t take our word for it. Try it free for a whole month

Greenwashing litigation on the rise Read More »

Senate sends $8.8B EPA budget to Trump

The funding is about 4% less than last year but more than 50% more than a previous White House proposal. It cuts funding for Superfund activities but maintains other operations funding and research

By Megan Quinn, Senior Reporter, Waste Dive

The Senate on Thursday approved an $8.8 billion budget for the U.S. EPA through the end of the fiscal year in September. The approval is part of a three-bill funding package that also approves certain science spending and budgets for the departments of Justice, Interior, Commerce and Energy.

The bill, which now heads to President Donald Trump for signature, includes funding for key programs such as Superfund, but 47% less than the previous year’s budget. It also provides funding for various research projects involving PFAS, landfill methane, eRINs and numerous water quality and safety programs.

The funding amount is about 4% less than last year’s budget of about $9 billion, but both environmental groups and lawmakers said the cuts were less dire than the White House had previously signaled. The president’s original budget proposal for the agency was around $4.16 billion.

Read the full story

Senate sends $8.8B EPA budget to Trump Read More »

Bill expands New Jersey Fresh marketing to seafood

(TRENTON) – Governor Phil Murphy this week signed into law a bill to strengthen New Jersey’s aquaculture industry by expanding the promotion of locally grown seafood through the Jersey Fresh program.

Bill A3034, sponsored by Assemblymen Clinton Calabrese, Roy Freiman, and William Spearman, will direct the Department of Agriculture to advertise and promote New Jersey aquaculture products under the State’s widely recognized Jersey Fresh branding initiative.

“Aquaculture is an increasingly important part of New Jersey’s agricultural economy, and the farmers behind it deserve the same visibility and marketing support as other Jersey Fresh producers,” said Assemblyman Calabrese (D-Bergen, Passaic). “This bill helps connect consumers with high-quality, locally grown seafood while also supporting businesses and job creation along our coast and inland waterways.”

By incorporating aquaculture into Jersey Fresh promotions, the legislation will boost consumer awareness, increase demand for New Jersey seafood, and support sustainable food production across the state.

“Jersey Fresh is all about promoting the best New Jersey’s agricultural community has to offer, and that includes our aquaculturists,” said Assemblyman Freiman (D-Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Somerset). “Expanding Jersey Fresh to include aquaculture ensures our marketing efforts don’t stop at the water’s edge, but rather reflect the full range of products grown and raised in the Garden State.”

The bill recognizes aquaculture as a key component of New Jersey’s food system, helping producers compete in regional markets while giving consumers more opportunities to buy local.

“Our Jersey Fresh program is trusted by consumers, and this legislation puts that trusted label to work for aquaculture businesses,” said Assemblyman Spearman (D-Camden, Gloucester). “Promoting local seafood supports economic growth, sustainability, and food security for communities across New Jersey.”

Bill expands New Jersey Fresh marketing to seafood Read More »

Attorney Maureen Rowan joining New Jersey Assembly

First Democratic woman to represent the 2nd Leg. District

(TRENTON) – Maureen Rowan was sworn into the New Jersey General Assembly on Tuesday by Assembly Speaker Craig J. Coughlin. Assemblywoman Rowan now represents the 2nd Legislative District in Atlantic County, becoming the first Democratic woman to represent Atlantic County in the Legislature.

“Assemblywoman Rowan’s experience as both an attorney and a small business owner gives her a valuable perspective on the challenges New Jersey families face,” said Speaker Coughlin (D-Middlesex). “I am confident she will be a strong voice for Atlantic County and a dedicated partner in our efforts to energize Atlantic City’s tourism economy, expand workforce opportunities, and protect the rights of all New Jerseyans.”

Assemblywoman Rowan brings over three decades of experience as a respected trial attorney and former managing partner of her own law firm, where she oversaw daily operations and advocated for clients. She plans to apply her legal background and business expertise to fight for Atlantic County residents and ensure their rights, needs, and interests remain a priority in Trenton.

“After 35 years practicing law and advocating for clients, I am humbled to bring that experience to Trenton,” said Assemblywoman Rowan (D-Atlantic). “My priorities are clear: economic security, reproductive freedom, affordable health care, expanding access to housing, and strong public schools. I will always fight for the people of Atlantic County and make sure their voices are heard.”

Assemblywoman Rowan earned her Bachelor of Arts degree from LaSalle College and her Juris Doctor from Temple University.

Attorney Maureen Rowan joining New Jersey Assembly Read More »

Hold that fork, hold that spoon…if they’re plastic

TRENTON – To cut down on unnecessary single-use plastics and, in turn, reduce the strain on the environment, the New Jersey Senate approved legislation sponsored by Senator Bob Smith and Senator Raj Mukherji that would require casual food service businesses to provide single-use utensils and condiments to customers upon request only.

The bill, S3195, would also prohibit full-service restaurants from providing on-site diners with single-use utensils.

     “Millions of tons of plastics are disposed of every year in this country, most of which ends up in a landfill at best, and into urban areas or the ocean at worst,” said Senator Smith (D-Middlesex/Somerset). “This bill would make significant strides to decrease the amount of litter that ends up in our communities. Through an educational campaign, we will also work to show our residents and businesses the many benefits of cutting down on single-use plastics.”

     “This bill does not prohibit single-use plastic utensils at your favorite fast-food drive-thru,” said Senator Mukherji (D-Hudson). “It merely reduces the harm from plastic waste by curbing the excessive provision of single-use plastics and condiments when the customer has not requested any. Further, reusable and washable utensils are just as useful while posing significantly less risk to our environment.”

     The bill’s provisions apply to restaurants, cafes, food trucks, vendor stations, cafeterias, or any other facility or premises where meals are prepared and served to customers for immediate consumption, whether on a take-out, eat-in, drive-thru, or delivery basis. Notable exemptions include schools, health care facilities, and correctional facilities. However, the bill specifically differentiates between the requirements for casual dining establishments and full-service restaurants.

     Under the bill, casual food dining establishments, which cover entities such as fast food establishments, food courts, food trucks, and gas stations and convenience stores, would be required to provide single-use utensils and condiments only if requested by a customer.

     Full-service restaurants with seating for 10 or more customers must provide on-site patrons with easy access to reusable, washable utensils for use on the premises. If a full-service restaurant offers takeout or delivery, it may provide single-use utensils and condiments with takeout orders upon customer request.

     Violations of the legislation would incur penalties. Specifically, food service businesses would be subject to a warning upon the first offense, a civil penalty of $100 upon the second offense, and a civil penalty of $250 for the third and each subsequent offense. If a food service business did not commit a violation for at least 12 months from the time a third or subsequent penalty was assessed, the next penalty would be reduced to a second offense.

     No food service business, however, would be subject to a penalty under the bill if it acquires, possesses, or maintains a supply of single-use plastic utensils or condiments to provide to customers upon request.

     Any money collected from penalties imposed under the bill would be deposited into the “Clean Communities Program Fund” to finance litter pickup, removal, education, and enforcement programs at the State and local levels. A municipality or entity certified to enforce the bill may retain 30 percent of any penalty it collects under the law.

     Finally, the bill would require the Department of Environmental Protection to develop a 180-day education campaign to inform New Jersey residents about the financial and environmental benefits of reducing the use of single-use utensils and condiments. It would additionally encourage responsible use by reminding individuals not to take more items than needed from a self-serve condiment station or utensil dispenser.”

Hold that fork, hold that spoon…if they’re plastic Read More »

Judge strikes down Trump’s decree to halt offshore wind

By Lisa Friedman and Maxine Joselow, Reporting from Washington, Jan. 12, 2026

A federal judge on Monday ruled that construction could resume on a $6.2 billion wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island, striking down the Trump administration’s decision last month to halt work on the Revolution Wind project.

Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Interior Department’s suspension order was “arbitrary and capricious” in violation of federal law.

Revolution Wind is one of five offshore wind projects under construction along the East Coast that were ordered to stop work last month by the Trump administration, which cited unspecified national security concerns. Several states, as well as developers of four of the projects, have challenged the move in court. The case involving Revolution Wind was the first complaint to be heard.

The decision is a temporary victory for Revolution Wind and the offshore wind industry, which has been roiled by the Trump administration’s efforts to block offshore wind farms that had received permits under the Biden administration. Orsted, the Danish energy giant that is building Revolution Wind, can now continue with construction as litigation it has filed against the Trump administration proceeds.