NAW secures injunction blocking enforcement of Oregon’s EPR law

The National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW) says it has secured a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of Oregon’s Recycling Modernization Act (RMA), which establishes a statewide extended producer responsibility (EPR) program.

The injunction prevents Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) from enforcing the law on NAW members until the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon rules on its merits. The law took effect July 1, 2025.

RELATED: NAW seeks preliminary injunction to halt Oregon’s EPR law | PPRC 2025: Tracking EPR’s progress

The NAW claims the Portland-based court agreed that the law’s “opaque regulatory scheme” raises serious questions about whether the act violates the due process and dormant commerce clauses in the United States Constitution.

“This ruling is a significant victory for NAW members, who face imminent and irreparable harm under the act, including unrecoverable compliance costs, competitive distortions and the risk of steep civil penalties,” NAW President and CEO Eric Hoplin says. “This is a major win for NAW member companies who have been dramatically impacted by the exorbitant fees imposed under the law by the Circular Action Alliance. NAW looks forward to presenting its case on the merits when the court hears our case on July 13.”

The Washington-based organization filed its motion for a preliminary injunction in November, asking the court to pause all obligations under the RMA, including reporting and payment requirements, pending final resolution of the case. NAW initially filed suit against the DEQ, the Oregon Environmental Commission and Oregon Attorney General Daniel A. Rayfield on July 30, 2025.

When it announced its lawsuit, the organization said the EPR law “misses the target” in terms of encouraging a circular economy and modernizing the state’s recycling program.

“While NAW supports the goal of a circular economy, the Oregon EPR law, as enacted, is unconstitutional, creates new mandates, inhibits interstate commerce and fails at its primary goal of encouraging circularity,” Hoplin said last July.

“Rather than encourage sustainability through a uniform and transparent system where compliance burdens are shared across industries, Oregon chose to shift the burden to the parts of the supply chain that have little to no control over decisions to design, reduce, reuse or recycle a product.”

The lawsuit also alleges that Oregon’s EPR program “mandates producers sign contracts with a single approved private organization, giving up their economic freedom and due process rights.” The organization described is the Circular Action Alliance, which serves as the state’s producer responsibility organization (PRO).