Oregon EPR lawsuit: where the challenge stands (2026)
The National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW) sued over Oregon's packaging law, the Recycling Modernization Act (RMA), in federal court in Portland. After a five-day trial, the court ruled on August 27, 2026 that the law doesn't violate the U.S. Constitution, and entered judgment for the state on August 28, 2026. NAW appealed to the 9th Circuit on September 24, 2026, and that appeal is pending. Oregon DEQ's producer page still lists the law's obligations: register with the Circular Action Alliance (CAA), report and pay. This page sets out the case from the court records. It doesn't predict the outcome.
The case at a glance
Case:National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors v. Feldon, No. 3:25-cv-01334-SI, U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon (Portland), Judge Michael H. Simon.
Filed: July 30, 2025.
Plaintiff: NAW, a trade association whose members include producers subject to the RMA's fees.
Defendant: Leah Feldon, Director of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), in her official capacity. NAW first sued DEQ, the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission and Oregon's Attorney General. Its amended complaint named the DEQ Director and four Commission members instead.
District court result: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on August 27, 2026 (ECF 205); judgment for the defendant on August 28, 2026 (ECF 206).
Appeal: notice of appeal filed September 24, 2026 (ECF 209). In the 9th Circuit it is No. 26-6404, docketed September 30, 2026. No decision yet.
What NAW claimed
NAW asked the court to declare the RMA unconstitutional and to bar DEQ from enforcing it. Its amended complaint claimed violations of:
the dormant Commerce Clause;
the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment;
the Equal Protection Clause and the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine;
three provisions of the Oregon Constitution: its due process, equal privileges and immunities, and nondelegation provisions.
On February 6, 2026 (ECF 88) the court dismissed the claims against the four Commission members, and the Equal Protection, unconstitutional-conditions and Oregon Constitution claims, without prejudice. NAW didn't refile them. Two claims went to trial:
Dormant Commerce Clause. NAW argued that the law discriminates against interstate commerce in its purpose, on its face (pointing to the exemption for public bodies) and in its effects (pointing to the small-producer exemptions). It also argued that CAA's membership fees are unreasonable user fees, and that the law's burden on interstate commerce clearly exceeds its local benefits.
Due Process. NAW argued that the RMA unconstitutionally hands regulatory power, including setting fees, to a private organization (CAA), and that the processes for assessing and collecting fees aren't adequate.
The preliminary injunction (February to August 2026)
February 6, 2026 (ECF 88): the court granted NAW's motion for a preliminary injunction on the two remaining claims. It found "serious questions" going to the merits, a likelihood of irreparable injury, and a balance of hardships tipping sharply toward NAW. It barred DEQ from enforcing the RMA against NAW and its members.
April 6, 2026 (ECF 134): the court denied DEQ's motion for reconsideration but narrowed the order. It now covered only NAW and companies that were NAW members as of February 6, 2026. DEQ could enforce the law against members who joined later.
The injunction never applied to companies outside NAW. CAA wrote on February 10, 2026 that "The RMA remains in effect" and that the injunction "applies exclusively to NAW and its members".
Trade press (Resource Recycling) reports that the August 27, 2026 ruling dissolved the preliminary injunction: "It also dissolved the preliminary injunction that had shielded NAW members from enforcement since February" ("NAW appeals Oregon EPR ruling", September 25, 2026). We couldn't confirm that in the court's own documents: the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (ECF 205) and the August 28 judgment (ECF 206) don't mention the injunction, and we couldn't read the docket text. In the district court filings we could read, through the notice of appeal on September 24, 2026, we found no order keeping the injunction in force after judgment. We also found no motion for an injunction or stay pending appeal there. A joint filing in a related case on September 9, 2026 (described below) says "No post-trial motion has been filed" in NAW's case.
The trial and the ruling
Trial: a bench trial (no jury) from July 13 to 17, 2026. NAW called eight witnesses and DEQ called five. The court received 57 exhibits and nine amicus briefs from sixteen amici.
August 27, 2026: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (ECF 205, 71 pages). The court concluded that the RMA "does not violate either the dormant Commerce Clause or the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution." It rejected each strand of NAW's argument: discrimination, user fees, excessive burden, private delegation and procedural due process.
August 28, 2026: Judgment (ECF 206). "Judgment is entered in favor of Defendant, Leah Feldon, and against Plaintiff, National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors."
Why you'll see both dates: the written decision is dated and filed August 27, and the separate judgment is dated and filed August 28. NAW's notice of appeal is taken from "the Judgment entered … on August 28, 2026". Reports that give either date are describing different documents.
The 9th Circuit appeal
Notice of appeal: filed September 24, 2026 in the district court (ECF 209), appealing the August 28 judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
Appeal number: No. 26-6404 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, docketed September 30, 2026.
Status: pending, with no decision.
Briefing schedule: we haven't been able to read the 9th Circuit's scheduling order yet, so we don't list dates here. We'll add them once we've read them on the court's docket.
Injunction pending appeal: none in the district court filings we could read. Trade press (Resource Recycling) reports that the August 27 ruling dissolved the February injunction (see above). We couldn't confirm the 9th Circuit docket entries either way.
Related cases
Lollicup USA, Inc. v. Feldon, D. Or. No. 3:26-cv-01287-SI, filed June 25, 2026 before the same judge. It is a proposed class action for producers above Oregon's small-producer thresholds that the NAW injunction didn't protect. It makes the same dormant Commerce Clause and Due Process claims. The court has struck all pending deadlines. On September 9, 2026 (ECF 11) the parties asked to move their joint status report to October 16, 2026, so that they would know whether NAW had appealed.
National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors v. Ryan, D. Colo. No. 1:26-cv-03460, filed July 30, 2026, challenges Colorado's packaging EPR law. See our Colorado guide.
Is Oregon's law in force now?
Yes. The RMA has been in effect throughout the case, and the district court has now ruled for the state. DEQ's page for producers of covered products doesn't mention the lawsuit. It says that "From 2025 onward" producers of packaging, paper and food serviceware must, under ORS 459A.869(1) and (5):
register with an approved producer responsibility organization (CAA is Oregon's only one);
report data to it on the covered products they supply in or into Oregon;
pay membership fees to it.
DEQ's page also says:
Small producers as defined in ORS 459A.863(32) are exempt.
The 25 largest producers owe their first life cycle evaluation disclosures by December 31, 2026.
Failing to register with or join a PRO is a Class 1 violation with fines of up to $25,000 per day.
Oregon's small-producer tests haven't changed: under $5 million in global gross revenue in the most recent fiscal year, or under 1 metric ton of covered products into Oregon in the most recent calendar year, among others. Meeting any one test exempts you.
Upcoming Oregon dates, unaffected by the appeal so far:
October 30, 2026 (4 p.m.): comments close on DEQ's "Recycling Modernization Act Updates 2026" rulemaking.
January 2027: the first invoice of 2027 fees (50%, with the rest in July).
Around June 1, 2027: the annual supply report for 2026 data (CAA's default is May 31, and the date isn't announced yet).
What to watch
The 9th Circuit docket in No. 26-6404: the briefing schedule, any motion for an injunction pending appeal, and later an argument date.
The October 16, 2026 joint status report requested in Lollicup.
DEQ's rulemaking. Its proposed rules (notice dated September 21, 2026) would add new exemptions, including plastic film in direct contact with raw meat, poultry and seafood through 2032. These are proposed rules, not yet adopted.
Under Oregon's thresholds? The small-producer tests apply whatever happens on appeal. Check them, and the other six states, in one place.
General information, not legal advice. We describe the court records as filed and don't predict how the appeal will come out. Court dockets change; we re-check this page as filings come in.