Death to Red Dye 40? California Bans Artificial Colors in Food
In California, a bag of Skittles may soon look completely different. And so may your beloved Cheetos, Doritos, and Froot Loops. California governor Gavin Newsom recently signed into law the California School Food Safety Act, which targets specific artificial food dyes. This is the first state to enact a law against synthetic dyes in food products.
What Is the California Food Safety Act?
This California bill, signed into law on September 28, 2024, bans food companies from using six food dyes in their products if they want to be sold in California public schools. The specific food dyes are Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, Green 3, Blue 1, and Blue 2.
Companies have until the end of 2027 to remove these ingredients or they will not be able to sell them in California public school cafeterias and vending machines. The California public school system is the largest in the U.S., with over 6.3 million students.
What Is the Reason Behind the California School Food Safety Act?
Assembly Member Jesse Gabriel introduced Assembly Bill 2316 after a state report showed a connection between synthetic food dyes and instances of ADHD, behavioral problems, and hyperactivity in children.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) maintains that these food additives are safe. However, the European Union requires these same dyes to carry a warning label.
What Does the FDA Say About Food Dyes?
In looking at California’s research on artificial dyes and children’s behavior, the FDA concluded that “most children have no adverse effects when consuming food containing color additives, but some evidence suggests that certain children may be sensitive to them.”
However, the FDA may soon be following California’s lead. Last year, California lawmakers banned harmful food additives, including brominated vegetable oil, in the California Food Safety Act. In the summer of 2024, the FDA followed suit, banning the chemical from use in U.S. food and drinks due to toxicity concerns.
Is the California School Food Safety Act Constitutional?
In 2012, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg backed a “soda ban” that would limit the size of sugary soft drinks sold in NYC restaurants, movie theatres, and stadiums to no larger than 16 ounces. The legislation’s goal was to curb rising obesity rates and promote healthier habits.
However, a judge struck down the ban in 2013 due to “arbitrary and capricious consequences.” The case went to the New York State Court of Appeals, and the court found that the Board of Health “exceeded the scope of its regulatory authority.” As a result, the ban never went into effect.
California must have a legitimate purpose in enacting the food dye ban, such as addressing a public health or safety concern. The law should not be arbitrary or unreasonable, meaning the specifics of the law should be rationally related to achieving the state’s interest. And the law should not discriminate against a group or individual.
California could argue that it has a legitimate concern about the rising neurobehavioral problems in children and the food dyes that contribute to them, that a law limiting food dyes in food offered at public schools is a rational law to address their concern, and that the ban does not discriminate against a protected class.
What Is the Future of Artificial Colors in Food?
Manufacturers wanting to sell their products in California public schools have until December 31, 2027, to replace synthetic dyes with alternatives like carrot or beet juice for color, which they currently do for their European market.
California is a leader in advocacy and lawmaking, being the first state to ban single-use plastic bags or mandating electric car use. It will be interesting to see the FDA’s response to states like California passing similar bans against artificial food dyes in our food supply.
Related Resources
- Your Orange Juice Isn’t Very Natural, Lawsuits Claim - FindLaw (FindLaw Learn About the Law)
- Food Companies Face Heightened Scrutiny Over Labels (FindLaw Courtside)
- NYC’s Big Soda Ban Fizzes Out, Nixed by N.Y.’s Highest Court (FindLaw Archives)
