State Won't Oppose Added SB 54 Challenge

California's Attorney General has signaled no objection to plaintiffs adding a challenge to SB 54 to an existing lawsuit over SB 343 labeling rules.

Updated on Nov. 4, 2026 in Organic Food

State Won't Oppose Added SB 54 Challenge

The California Attorney General filed a Notice of Non-Opposition to plaintiffs' request to file a Second Amended Complaint that adds challenges to provisions of SB 54. The notice reserves the state's right to seek dismissal of the amended complaint later.

Why it matters

The amendment would expand a federal challenge in the Southern District of California to cover California's SB 54 alongside SB 343, affecting how food producers in the state can be regulated. The Attorney General's non-opposition is a significant factor the court will weigh in deciding whether to allow the amendment.

The proposed Second Amended Complaint adds ten causes of action and names two additional defendants. The court has scheduled a hearing on the Motion for Leave for November 16, 2026, with a ruling expected shortly after.

The players

California Attorney General

The state's chief legal officer, responsible for defending California's laws, including SB 54 and SB 343, in litigation like this case.

California League of Food Producers

The industry group that brought the lawsuit challenging California's food labeling rules under SB 343 in federal court.

The details

Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Leave on October 8, 2026, seeking to add challenges to SB 54 to the California League of Food Producers v. Bonta case, which currently targets SB 343. On October 23 the court vacated a scheduled Early Neutral Evaluation conference and set briefing deadlines, and on November 2 the Attorney General filed a notice declining to oppose the amendment.

October 8, 2026: Plaintiffs file Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint.
October 23, 2026: Court vacates Early Neutral Evaluation conference and sets briefing deadlines.
November 2, 2026: Attorney General files Notice of Non-Opposition.
November 16, 2026: Hearing on the Motion for Leave scheduled.

Organic Food Regulation

The lawsuit extends a legal fight over California's SB 343 labeling rules for food products, which the state has defended as part of its broader push for transparency in food sourcing and production claims. Adding SB 54 to the case widens the regulatory scope of that ongoing dispute.

If the amended complaint is allowed, the labeling and sourcing rules that apply to food products sold in California could face new legal scrutiny. Shoppers may see changes in how organic and other food claims are presented on labels if the challenges succeed.

The takeaway

Watch the November 16 hearing, since the court's decision on whether to admit the SB 54 challenge will shape how far the lawsuit reaches. Readers interested in food labeling rules should track how the court responds to the state's non-opposition.