New Mexico PFAS
September 23, 2026 | Written by GreenSoft Technology, Inc.
District Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Blocking Enforcement of New Mexico PFAS Labeling Requirement
Summary: A federal district court has temporarily blocked enforcement of New Mexico's PFAS product-labeling requirement, 20.13.2.13 NMAC, while litigation proceeds. The injunction applies only to the labeling provision and does not suspend other obligations under New Mexico's PFAS regulatory framework, including reporting requirements, product restrictions, and Currently Unavoidable Use (CUU) provisions. Manufacturers should continue evaluating their compliance obligations as the case moves forward.
Federal Court Temporarily Blocks New Mexico PFAS Labeling Requirement
On September 16, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the New Mexico PFAS labeling mandate, found in Rule 20.13.2.13 NMAC, while the lawsuit continues.
The court's ruling is preliminary and does not represent a final decision regarding the validity of the regulation. The injunction is limited to the PFAS labeling provision and does not affect other portions of the state's PFAS regulatory program. Manufacturers should continue reviewing applicable reporting obligations, product restrictions, and Currently Unavoidable Use (CUU) requirements separately.
Background: New Mexico's Expanding PFAS Regulatory Framework
New Mexico has become one of several U.S. states adopting broad restrictions on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Following the passage of the PFAS Protection Act (HB 212) in April 2025, the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board (EIB) finalized Rule 20.13.2 NMAC on May 5, 2026, with an effective date of July 1, 2026.
The regulation established extensive compliance obligations for manufacturers, including:
- Product prohibitions
- Reporting requirements
- Product labeling requirements
- Testing obligations
- Regulatory fees
- A framework for Currently Unavoidable Use (CUU) determinations
With adoption of these requirements, New Mexico joined Maine and Minnesota as one of the leading states implementing comprehensive PFAS controls across multiple product categories.
WEBINAR
U.S. States PFAS Requirements for Electronics Manufacturers
Status Updates on New Mexico and other State Regulations
Join us Sept. 30 for an overview of requirements in New Mexico, Minnesota, Maine, Washington, and Connecticut. Learn how these overlapping requirements impact electronic components, assemblies, and finished products and what steps manufacturers should take now to prepare.
Why Did the Court Issue the Preliminary Injunction?
The court's decision arose from the case American Chemistry Council v. Kenney. The plaintiffs challenged New Mexico's PFAS labeling requirement on First Amendment grounds.
According to the court, the challengers were likely to succeed on their First Amendment claim. While the court agreed that the proposed label was factual and uncontroversial, it concluded that New Mexico had not demonstrated a sufficient connection between the labeling mandate and its stated consumer health and environmental objectives.
The court noted that the state characterized the labeling requirement primarily as a consumer-awareness measure rather than a warning about product risk. Based on that reasoning, the court found that the asserted governmental interests may not adequately support compelled disclosure.
What Compliance Requirements Remain in Effect?
The ruling is narrow and affects only the labeling provision. It does not invalidate the broader PFAS regulatory framework. Manufacturers should continue monitoring and preparing for:
- PFAS reporting obligations
- Product-specific restrictions and prohibitions
- CUU-related requirements
- Future implementation deadlines under New Mexico's PFAS program
The state may appeal the decision to the Tenth Circuit or seek additional judicial relief. The court also did not address whether a differently designed PFAS label could survive future legal review. As a result, manufacturers should not view the injunction as a permanent suspension of PFAS compliance obligations in New Mexico.
Questions also remain regarding the scope of the injunction and the impact on certain regulatory deadlines. Companies should continue consulting legal counsel and compliance professionals as additional guidance becomes available. This information is intended as general educational information and should not be interpreted as legal advice.
What Electronics Manufacturers Should Do Next
Electronics manufacturers selling products into New Mexico should continue tracking developments in the state's PFAS program and evaluating the impact of:
- Product content restrictions
- Supply-chain PFAS disclosures
- Regulatory reporting obligations
- Emerging state-level PFAS requirements
The temporary injunction alters the immediate status of the labeling requirement but does not eliminate broader compliance responsibilities under New Mexico's PFAS regulatory framework.
Learn More About U.S. PFAS Requirements
PFAS regulations across the United States continue to evolve rapidly, creating new reporting, disclosure, and product compliance obligations for electronics manufacturers. New Mexico remains one of the most consequential jurisdictions in 2026 because of its broad PFAS regulatory requirements affecting manufacturers, distributors, and brands selling electrical and electronic equipment.
To help manufacturers navigate requirements in New Mexico, Minnesota, Maine, Washington, and Connecticut, GreenSoft Technology is hosting a webinar focused on current PFAS compliance developments and practical compliance strategies. The session will also discuss the recent New Mexico litigation and its potential implications for manufacturers. Register now to save your spot.
