Mary Kay Maintains PCPSA ‘Falls Short’ On Preemption Grounds
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
Executive Summary
The Rose Sheet offers a comparative analysis of federal preemption provisions in the Personal Care Products Safety Act and Cosmetic Modernization Amendments of 2015, proposed in the US Senate and House, respectively. Mary Kay isn’t budging in its position that the former provides insufficient assurance of national uniformity.
You may also be interested in...
House Cosmetic Bills Conflict On Preemption, Cast PCPSA As Compromise
Tucker Ellis attorney Ronie Schmelz discusses preemption language in the discussion draft from New Jersey congressmen Frank Pallone and Leonard Lance, which actually just confirms that state regulations could continue unchecked. The proposal could identify the Personal Care Products Safety Act in the Senate as the compromise between no preemption and the blanket preemption clause in another House draft bill.
Senate HELP To Hear From Stakeholders In Changed Cosmetics Industry
Since 2012 when a House committee held the last cosmetics hearing, industry generally has warmed to – or resigned itself to – legislative proposals to update the cosmetics regulatory system. However, there is still not consensus on the details among big business, SMEs and consumer advocates, all of which will be represented at the Senate HELP Committee’s witness table.
Pallone/Lance Cosmetics Proposal Leaves Preemption Blanks To Be Filled
The New Jersey congressmen are still working on language regarding a key challenge facing cosmetics legislation. There is still no consensus among stakeholders on whether and to what extent states should be barred from imposing regulations on cosmetic companies that differ from or add to federal requirements.