From First Amendment litigation and state enforcement actions to DEA scheduling decisions and legislative victories, regulatory developments continue to shape the dietary supplement marketplace. Here's a look at four recent actions affecting manufacturers, retailers, and the broader natural products industry.

NY age-restriction law: CRN continues Supreme Court fight 

The law took effect in April 2024 and prohibits the sale of supplements to individuals under 18 if they are marketed for weight loss or muscle building. CRN challenged the law in federal district court in March 2024, alleging it violates First Amendment protections for commercial speech. After the district court denied a preliminary injunction, the Second Circuit affirmed the decision in November 2025, finding the law met the legal standard for regulating commercial speech. CRN contends the court made its decision without requiring empirical evidence that the restriction would directly and materially advance the state’s public health goals and deferred to legislative judgment without adequately considering less restrictive alternatives.

In 2026, CRN petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review, asking the Court to resolve conflicts among the federal circuits concerning the evidentiary burden governments must satisfy before restricting truthful commercial speech and the degree of judicial scrutiny required under the First Amendment. 

As CRN explained, the latest filing responds to the State of New York's opposition to CRN's petition for a writ of certiorari and explains why Supreme Court review is necessary to resolve significant First Amendment questions affecting businesses nationwide. 

CRN noted the importance of protecting minors from dangerous products, but argues that New York's law regulates speech—not product safety—by using marketing claims as the trigger for age restrictions while failing to demonstrate that those speech-based restrictions materially alleviate the harms the Legislature identified. CRN says the filing argues that:

• The Second Circuit's decision weakens longstanding constitutional protections for commercial speech by allowing government restrictions based on speculation rather than evidence.
• The appellate court improperly accepted the Legislature's use of product marketing as a proxy for harm without requiring proof that restricting truthful marketing claims would directly reduce the harms the State identified.
• The Second Circuit departed from precedent by deferring to legislative judgment rather than requiring the State to demonstrate that less speech-restrictive alternatives would be insufficient.
• These legal errors deepen existing disagreements among federal appellate courts regarding the standards governments must satisfy before restricting truthful commercial speech.

"Our reply brief makes clear that this case is not about whether states may protect minors from genuinely dangerous products—it is about whether the government may regulate truthful speech without demonstrating that doing so actually advances public health," said Megan Olsen, Senior Vice President and General Counsel at CRN. "The Second Circuit's decision allows legislative assumptions to substitute for constitutional scrutiny, weakening First Amendment protections that have governed commercial speech for decades. We believe the Supreme Court should take this opportunity to reaffirm that governments must rely on evidence—not speculation—when they seek to burden truthful communications about lawful products."

Next steps: With this filing, CRN said, the certiorari briefing before the Supreme Court is complete, and the Court will determine in the coming months whether it will hear the case.

Background: Read more on age restriction efforts across the U.S., industry actions, and the science.

TX investigating heavy metals in protein powders: NPA helps educate

In June, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced his industry-wide investigation into protein powder manufacturers based on concerns of heavy metals found in popular protein powders. Paxton's announcement pointed to testing done by Consumer Reports, which determined that lead levels in plant-based protein powders were an average of nine times higher than those made with dairy proteins such as whey and twice as high as beef-based products. The announcement also pointed to testing by the Clean Label Project showing that 47% of the 160 protein powder products tested exceeded California Proposition 65 limits for toxic heavy metals in a serving. 

“Protein is a vital macronutrient for human health, and Texans deserve clean protein powders without having to worry whether the products contain heavy metals or other harmful chemicals,” Paxton said in his announcement. “Far too many corporations have snuck harmful ingredients in their products, and I am committed to doing everything I can to help Make America Healthy Again.” 

The Natural Products Association (NPA) requested a meeting with Paxton’s office. In a letter to the AG's office, Daniel Fabricant, Ph.D., NPA President and CEO, explained, "The current good manufacturing practices (cGMPs) in 21 CFR Part 111 establish rigorous, science-based requirements ensuring that products meet established specifications for identity, purity, strength, and composition; carry enforceable limits on contaminants, including heavy metals; and are manufactured, packaged, labeled, and stored under conditions designed to prevent adulteration. These are not voluntary industry commitments; these are federal obligations. Similarly, our members manufacture food-labeled protein powders in accordance with the food regulations in 21 CFR Part 117. These regulations cover cGMPs, hazard analysis, and risk-based preventive controls to protect human health."

Responding to the announcement, Dr. Fabricant said in a statement:

NPA shares the Attorney General’s commitment to consumer safety and welcomes the opportunity to provide important context about the rigorous federal regulatory framework governing dietary supplements and food products, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s current good manufacturing practices, testing protocols, and contaminant controls.

This is exactly why sustained advocacy matters. When public officials raise questions about the safety of natural products, it is critical that regulators hear directly from experts who understand the science, the law, and the manufacturing standards already in place to protect consumers. NPA’s role is to ensure those conversations are grounded in facts, federal law and regulations, and sound science.

NPA has a longstanding record of challenging incomplete data, misleading headlines, or testing methods that do not reflect the safeguards responsible manufacturers use every day to protect American consumers.

For 90 years, NPA has worked to protect consumer access to safe, high-quality, science-backed products while defending the integrity of member companies that make and sell them. Our members invest significant resources in compliance, quality control, third-party testing, and consumer safety. They deserve a fair regulatory process that recognizes those efforts and distinguishes responsible manufacturers from bad actors who endanger consumers or engage in false and deceptive practices.

NPA will continue engaging constructively with federal and state officials to educate policymakers, defend science-based regulation, and ensure that American consumers can have confidence in the products they use. This kind of advocacy is only possible because of a committed industry that understands the importance of speaking with one voice and supporting the institutions that protect both consumers and responsible businesses.

DEA targeting synthetic 7-OH products: NPA supports action

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) filed its intent to temporarily place 7-hydroxymitagynine (7-OH) and three related substances into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Previously, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) confirmed synthetic 7-OH, and the three related substances have no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. One DEA Notice of Intent (NOI) addresses 7-OH above a specified threshold; a second NOI addresses moving 7-hydroxymitragynine-related substances (mitragynine pseudoindoxyl, MGM-15, and MGM-16) into Schedule I of the CSA. DEA added that the temporary scheduling does not apply to botanical kratom products that contain naturally occurring 7-OH below the specified threshold. 

In previous warning letters from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the agency has explained: "7-OH is not lawful in dietary supplements and cannot be lawfully added to conventional foods. Additionally, there are no FDA-approved drugs containing 7-OH, and it is illegal to market any drugs containing 7-OH. Consumers who use 7-OH products are exposing themselves to products that have not been proven safe or effective for any use."

The Natural Products Association (NPA), which expressed support for FDA's 7-OH warning letters, also expressed full support of DEA’s action. “The science clearly establishes that 7-OH is found in trace amounts in the Mitragyna speciosa plant,” said Daniel Fabricant, Ph.D., President and CEO of NPA. “We remain consistent in our position that highly concentrated amounts of 7-OH are falsely marketed as kratom and have not demonstrated pre-market safety through FDA’s new dietary ingredient notification process.”

Next steps: Once the temporary scheduling orders take effect, the manufacture, distribution, sale, and possession of covered 7-OH substances will become subject to criminal, civil, and administrative provisions of the Controlled Substances Act. 

“We applaud DEA’s leadership and encourage continued coordination with FDA to remove synthetic 7-OH and related substances that put American consumers at risk,” Dr. Fabricant added. “Products with a high potential for abuse have no place in the dietary supplement marketplace.”

Protecting herbal tinctures in NH: AHPA declares victory

Earlier this year, the American Herbal Products Association (AHPA) announced a coalition to address actions impacting access to alcohol-based herbal tinctures and liquid extracts in New Hampshire. The issue: Alcohol-based herbal tinctures and liquid extracts have been removed from New Hampshire retail shelves due to a lack of clarity under state law.

The trade group is now celebrating a legislative victory for the natural products industry and consumer choice, as New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte signed into law a permanent exemption protecting alcohol-based herbal tinctures and liquid extracts from state liquor regulations. As AHPA explained, the legislation (SB 524) creates a distinct section within New Hampshire state law that excludes alcohol-based herbal tinctures and liquid extracts marketed as dietary supplements from the jurisdiction of the New Hampshire Liquor Commission (NHLC). Thanks to the law, these herbal products can continue to be sold across standard retail outlets throughout the state. In addition to supplements, AHPA explained that the law exempts other non-beverage products containing alcohol, including homeopathic medicine, over-the-counter (OTC) allopathic drugs, and cosmetics.

The new regulatory framework officially takes effect in January 2027.

"This is a monumental win that codifies and permanently protects consumer access to traditional herbal liquid extracts," said AHPA President & CEO Graham Rigby. "When our industry faced an immediate threat to retail access in New Hampshire, AHPA did what it does best: we engaged, rallied the herbal community, and brought a proactive solution to the table. By working directly with state legislators and regulators, we successfully established a clear legal distinction between alcohol-based herbal tinctures and liquid extracts marketed as dietary supplements and NHLC-regulated liquor."

Rigby also noted that the members of AHPA's herbal tinctures and liquid extracts working group played a key role in the victory, adding, "AHPA remains fiercely committed to defending botanical stewardship, protecting consumer access, and ensuring our members' products have a secure, permanent place on standard retail shelves."