Center for Food Safety Secures Ruling for Greater Transparency on Bioengineered Food Labels with Revised Standards Due by January 2028

In a significant win for consumers seeking clearer information about genetically engineered foods, a federal district court issued a final order yesterday in ongoing litigation concerning U.S. Department of Agriculture regulations for the nation's first bioengineered food disclosures. An earlier appeals court ruling had found several aspects of the rules unlawful, leaving the lower court to determine the implementation timeline, which was settled after additional arguments.

"This ruling marks the end of the 2021 regulations that fell short of legal standards," stated George Kimbrell, Legal Director for CFS and lead counsel. "We welcome the district court's alignment with our position, consistent with the appeals court, in invalidating those provisions."

The underlying case targeted the USDA's implementation of the 2016 National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, the initial federal mandate for labeling genetically engineered products. The original regulations carved out exemptions for highly refined GMO ingredients like certain oils, which represent about 70 percent of such components in processed items. They also permitted exclusive use of digital QR codes for disclosures, despite internal USDA findings that this approach would limit access for many consumers. These elements formed the core of the legal challenge.

Following more than four years of proceedings, a federal appeals court in late 2025 issued a comprehensive opinion supporting the plaintiffs. It determined that the exclusion of ultra-processed foods violated the law and required elimination of the QR code-only option previously deemed invalid. Yesterday's remedy order sets the schedule for USDA to revise its approach. Although the agency sought an extension to 2029, the court adopted the plaintiffs' proposed deadline, rendering the flawed provisions invalid as of January 1, 2028. The agency is now expected to release updated rules within the coming year.

"Attention now turns to the USDA for compliance," noted Dashel Murawski, Communications Manager at Center for Food Safety. "Advocates for informed food choices must urge the administration to adhere to legal requirements. Individuals should have the ability to make personal decisions about their diets without hidden details on production methods. This outcome prioritizes public interests over regulatory gaps."

CFS represents a group of plaintiffs including Natural Grocers, PCC Natural Markets, Good Earth Natural Foods, National Organic Coalition, Citizens for GMO Labeling, Label GMOS, and Rural Vermont in this matter.

Public interest in knowing about genetic engineering in food stems from health and environmental considerations, particularly since most such crops are designed to tolerate higher pesticide applications. Common herbicides linked to these crops have faced extensive legal scrutiny over health concerns. This has contributed to broader increases in agricultural chemical use and permitted residue levels. Both processed foods and pesticide exposure have drawn attention in recent public health discussions.

More than 60 nations mandate GMO labeling, encompassing major trading partners. Domestic surveys have long shown strong support exceeding 90 percent for such disclosures. Early advocacy efforts spanned decades, leading to state-level actions in numerous jurisdictions before federal legislation in 2016. Subsequent implementation challenges prompted further legal steps to address shortcomings in the final rules.

The latest decision reinforces that USDA must correct the exclusion of ultra-processed items and the reliance on inaccessible digital labels, with full compliance required by the start of 2028.