Latest news with #ConsumerProductSafetyAct
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - Don't make me the last chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission
In what may be the first for an independent federal agency, the Consumer Product Safety Commission submitted a budget request to Congress last month proposing its own elimination. The Trump administration seeks to absorb elements of the commission into the Department of Health and Human Services in order to eliminate the agency's independence and reduce the transparency of its operations. The budget request also seeks to decrease the number of employees by 75 (to a total of 459) and reduce its budget by $16 million. If this budget request becomes law, I would likely be the last confirmed chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. It would mark the end of the commission as an independent agency dedicated to protecting the public from unsafe consumer products, and it would reverse 53 years of progress in product safety. This budget request would never have existed if Trump had not unlawfully removed three sitting commissioners, including myself, last month. U.S. District Court Judge Maddox found the president's actions unlawful on June 13, enabling us to resume our jobs as commissioners. However, the Trump administration has appealed this ruling and continues to seek our removal. President Richard Nixon signed the Consumer Product Safety Act into law in 1972, establishing CPSC as a bipartisan, independent agency led by five commissioners who are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Prior to that, the Department of Commerce and the Food and Drug Administration had responsibility for product safety, but their efforts lacked focus — as a result, Americans suffered. In the lead up to the creation of the CPSC, President Lyndon Johnson recognized that 'the homes that we live in can be more dangerous than a booby-trapped mine field' and that change was needed. The Consumer Product Safety Commission was created to clear this mine field. In establishing the agency, Congress recognized that its independence was important to ensure that it remained unfettered by political dictates and self-interested pressure from industry. Congress mandated that no more than three commissioners can belong to the same political party; that they are to be appointed to staggered terms, to ensure only a portion of their terms expire at any given time; and that they can only be removed for cause. These legal provisions were designed to prevent swift, drastic changes in the agency's composition and, ultimately, its regulations and policies. The commission's current structure promotes stability and continuity, which benefits consumers as well as manufacturers and sellers. In the months leading up to our removal, my colleagues and I opposed staff reductions to meet arbitrary White House demands. We advanced proposed mandatory product safety standards to save lives — including from horrific fires ignited by faulty lithium-ion batteries. We rejected efforts to dismantle and embed CPSC into the Department of Health and Human Services. Within weeks of our unlawful terminations, the remaining commissioners withdrew the proposed lithium-ion battery safety rule and embraced the administration's efforts to abolish the agency's independence and downsize our staff. The consequences of our absence were plain as the administration moved forward to eliminate the agency and weaken its functions. The changes proposed by the Trump administration are wholly unnecessary. For over 50 years, the commission has validated the vision of Nixon and Congress for improving product safety. For example, crib fatalities have decreased by nearly 80 percent; pediatric poisonings have decreased by 80 percent; deaths from residential fires have decreased by more than 64 percent. There have been dramatic injury reductions as well. Bicycle injuries have declined by about 35 percent. Baby walker injuries, which resulted in 25,000 emergency room visits in 1992, had dropped by 88 percent by 2020. Because of the commission's safety rules, children no longer suffocate in refrigerators, get crushed by closing garage doors or get entrapped underwater in swimming pool drain covers. Safety standards ban lead in toys and ensure that products manufactured for infants and toddlers meet basic safety standards. The elimination of this agency and the incorporation of its parts into this administration's troubled HHS would put the agency's successes and future product safety progress at risk. As was recognized more than 50 years ago, product safety gets lost within a large department with competing priorities. It would be too easy to put recalls or new product safety standards on the back burner when HHS is faced with a revamp of the Medicare system and with millions losing access to health care. In addition, as resources become harder to find, product safety staff and money may be shifted to politically favored projects within HHS at the whim of the secretary. Without an independent Consumer Product Safety Commission, there will be far less accountability and transparency. When an agency is independent and commissioners come from multiple perspectives, undue political influence is moderated. The commissioners can work together to build consensus but also act as a check on each other. This ensures that the agency's actions are transparent to the public and the agency is not taking political direction to favor one company over another. That is why, once the full commission was reinstated, it submitted a new budget request that affirms the independence of the agency and seeks full funding of its operations. This, however, does not change the administration's proposal or the HHS budget request to eliminate it and absorb parts of it into HHS. The president's request threatens product safety. But, fortunately, eliminating the Consumer Product Safety Commission as it has existed for more than 50 years would require an act of Congress. There are Republican and Democratic members of Congress who recognize the importance of CPSC's work and its independence. I hope they can convince their colleagues to reject the president's proposal. I don't want to be the last confirmed chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. And none of us want to go back to the days when the homes that we live in were 'more dangerous than a booby-trapped mine field.' Alexander Hoehn-Saric served as chair of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission from October 2021 through January 2025 and is now serving as a commissioner. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
11 hours ago
- Business
- The Hill
Don't make me the last chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission
In what may be the first for an independent federal agency, the Consumer Product Safety Commission submitted a budget request to Congress last month proposing its own elimination. The Trump administration seeks to absorb elements of the commission into the Department of Health and Human Services in order to eliminate the agency's independence and reduce the transparency of its operations. The budget request also seeks to decrease the number of employees by 75 (to a total of 459) and reduce its budget by $16 million. If this budget request becomes law, I would likely be the last confirmed chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. It would mark the end of the commission as an independent agency dedicated to protecting the public from unsafe consumer products, and it would reverse 53 years of progress in product safety. This budget request would never have existed if Trump had not unlawfully removed three sitting commissioners, including myself, last month. U.S. District Court Judge Maddox found the president's actions unlawful on June 13, enabling us to resume our jobs as commissioners. However, the Trump administration has appealed this ruling and continues to seek our removal. President Richard Nixon signed the Consumer Product Safety Act into law in 1972, establishing CPSC as a bipartisan, independent agency led by five commissioners who are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Prior to that, the Department of Commerce and the Food and Drug Administration had responsibility for product safety, but their efforts lacked focus — as a result, Americans suffered. In the lead up to the creation of the CPSC, President Lyndon Johnson recognized that 'the homes that we live in can be more dangerous than a booby-trapped mine field' and that change was needed. The Consumer Product Safety Commission was created to clear this mine field. In establishing the agency, Congress recognized that its independence was important to ensure that it remained unfettered by political dictates and self-interested pressure from industry. Congress mandated that no more than three commissioners can belong to the same political party; that they are to be appointed to staggered terms, to ensure only a portion of their terms expire at any given time; and that they can only be removed for cause. These legal provisions were designed to prevent swift, drastic changes in the agency's composition and, ultimately, its regulations and policies. The commission's current structure promotes stability and continuity, which benefits consumers as well as manufacturers and sellers. In the months leading up to our removal, my colleagues and I opposed staff reductions to meet arbitrary White House demands. We advanced proposed mandatory product safety standards to save lives — including from horrific fires ignited by faulty lithium-ion batteries. We rejected efforts to dismantle and embed CPSC into the Department of Health and Human Services. Within weeks of our unlawful terminations, the remaining commissioners withdrew the proposed lithium-ion battery safety rule and embraced the administration's efforts to abolish the agency's independence and downsize our staff. The consequences of our absence were plain as the administration moved forward to eliminate the agency and weaken its functions. The changes proposed by the Trump administration are wholly unnecessary. For over 50 years, the commission has validated the vision of Nixon and Congress for improving product safety. For example, crib fatalities have decreased by nearly 80 percent; pediatric poisonings have decreased by 80 percent; deaths from residential fires have decreased by more than 64 percent. There have been dramatic injury reductions as well. Bicycle injuries have declined by about 35 percent. Baby walker injuries, which resulted in 25,000 emergency room visits in 1992, had dropped by 88 percent by 2020. Because of the commission's safety rules, children no longer suffocate in refrigerators, get crushed by closing garage doors or get entrapped underwater in swimming pool drain covers. Safety standards ban lead in toys and ensure that products manufactured for infants and toddlers meet basic safety standards. The elimination of this agency and the incorporation of its parts into this administration's troubled HHS would put the agency's successes and future product safety progress at risk. As was recognized more than 50 years ago, product safety gets lost within a large department with competing priorities. It would be too easy to put recalls or new product safety standards on the back burner when HHS is faced with a revamp of the Medicare system and with millions losing access to health care. In addition, as resources become harder to find, product safety staff and money may be shifted to politically favored projects within HHS at the whim of the secretary. Without an independent Consumer Product Safety Commission, there will be far less accountability and transparency. When an agency is independent and commissioners come from multiple perspectives, undue political influence is moderated. The commissioners can work together to build consensus but also act as a check on each other. This ensures that the agency's actions are transparent to the public and the agency is not taking political direction to favor one company over another. That is why, once the full commission was reinstated, it submitted a new budget request that affirms the independence of the agency and seeks full funding of its operations. This, however, does not change the administration's proposal or the HHS budget request to eliminate it and absorb parts of it into HHS. The president's request threatens product safety. But, fortunately, eliminating the Consumer Product Safety Commission as it has existed for more than 50 years would require an act of Congress. There are Republican and Democratic members of Congress who recognize the importance of CPSC's work and its independence. I hope they can convince their colleagues to reject the president's proposal. I don't want to be the last confirmed chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. And none of us want to go back to the days when the homes that we live in were 'more dangerous than a booby-trapped mine field.' Alexander Hoehn-Saric served as chair of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission from October 2021 through January 2025 and is now serving as a commissioner.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
NCLA Asks D.C. Circuit Court to Erase CPSC's Illegal Infant Support Cushion Rule
Heroes Technology (US) LLC d/b/a Snuggle Me Organic v. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Washington, DC, June 04, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The New Civil Liberties Alliance has filed an opening brief urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to vacate the Consumer Product Safety Commission's mandatory Safety Standard for Infant Support Cushions, which regulates Heroes Technology's Snuggle Me Infant Lounger and some 2,000 other products. CPSC promulgated the Rule by unlawfully classifying these products as durable goods, instead of treating them as the textile or textile-based items they are. These products were thus regulated through a far less rigorous process than Congress ordinarily requires for consumer product safety standards. As a result of the Rule, the company had to stop producing its high-selling and highly sought-after Infant Lounger. NCLA urges the Court to remove this unlawful Rule that threatens our client's company and countless other small businesses. The Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) allows CPSC to use an expedited rulemaking process only when it promulgates mandatory safety standards governing durable products for children under 5 years old, like cribs or strollers. If the product is not a durable infant or toddler product, it must follow the traditional, more exacting regulatory process. CPSC used the expedited children's durable goods process to create its new Rule for 'infant support cushions'—a previously non-existent product category that the Rule created. But Snuggle Me Infant Loungers, a product made of organic cotton and polyester fiber that parents use to gently hold their infants when awake, are textile-based and generally not considered durable goods. CPSC had no authority to promulgate the mandatory Rule governing these products using the expedited and less careful process. Congress has stated it prefers voluntary product safety standards, yet the Rule allows CPSC to claim power over a major market segment instead of crafting product-specific voluntary standards with Heroes Technology and other eager industry partners. Since NCLA persuaded the Supreme Court to overturn the Chevron doctrine in June 2024, the agency is owed no deference regarding its untenable legal interpretation. Despite Heroes Technology and other companies raising serious concerns about the Rule's dubious justifications, CPSC proceeded to regulate them. The Commission also ignored producers' concerns about their ability to redesign their products and apply new and ill-defined testing methods in the time allotted by the Rule. The agency declared the regulation would be effective on May 5, 2025, just 180 days after its promulgation. This hasty choice was certainly not 'reasoned decisionmaking' by CPSC, making the Rule arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires agency actions to be 'reasonable and reasonably explained.' NCLA released the following statements: 'Government efficiency is something that is usually lauded. But here, CPSC chose a regulatory shortcut that not only ignores the limits of the agency's power but also was conducted using less rigorous methods and analyses than is required for most consumer products. When it comes to infant safety, the Commission should be focused on creating the best rules, not the fastest path to regulation.'— Kara Rollins, Litigation Counsel, NCLA 'CSPC's failure to maintain a consistent, textual definition of 'durable' in the statute threatens parents' access to useful products and endangers infants because the alternatives parents will use in the absence of those products are unknown and unaddressed by CPSC.'— John Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel, NCLA 'The D.C. Circuit should clamp down hard on CSPC's attempt to expand its power by taking a regulatory shortcut Congress only supplied for a very limited class of durable products. CPSC appears to be trying to end-run the D.C. Circuit's recent Window Covering Manufacturers ruling that required rigorous processes before issuing product safety standards. The agency deserves a hearty benchslap from the Court for this evasive maneuver.'— Mark Chenoweth, President, NCLA For more information visit the case page here. ABOUT NCLA NCLA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group founded by prominent legal scholar Philip Hamburger to protect constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State. NCLA's public-interest litigation and other pro bono advocacy strive to tame the unlawful power of state and federal agencies and to foster a new civil liberties movement that will help restore Americans' fundamental rights. ### CONTACT: Joe Martyak New Civil Liberties Alliance 703-403-1111 in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Amazon Claims It Is Not Responsible for Some Hazardous Products It Has Sold
PCMag editors select and review products independently. If you buy through affiliate links, we may earn commissions, which help support our testing. Amazon is suing the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) over the agency's order requiring the e-commerce giant to recall hazardous products sold to consumers on In the complaint filed in Maryland last week, Amazon argues that it was a logistics provider of the hazardous products in question and, therefore, isn't responsible for the recall. 'The Commission may issue recall orders to the manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of a product, but not to third-party logistics providers who store the product in their warehouses and transport it to customers,' Amazon says. The case dates back to 2021. The CPSC sued Amazon for selling over 400,000 units of products that posed a substantial hazard under the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA). The products were sold between 2019 and 2021 and included faulty carbon monoxide (CO) detectors, hair dryers without electrocution protection, and children's sleepwear violating federal flammability standards. Amazon later notified customers about the faulty products and blocked their sales. However, the CPSC took issue with two matters. One, the agency felt that Amazon 'downplayed the severity of the hazard by stating only that the product 'may' cause harm.' Two, the agency found that Amazon didn't provide a way to return the products or issue a full refund; instead, it only issued gift cards for Amazon credit. Last year, Amazon argued before an administrative law Judge that 'it was not a distributor and bore no responsibility for the safety of the products sold under its Fulfilled by Amazon program.' The judge, however, rejected Amazon's argument, determined it is a 'distributor,' and ordered the company to 'develop and submit proposed plans to notify purchasers and the public about the product hazards, and to provide refunds or replacements for these products.' As mentioned, Amazon now says it's only a logistics provider in this case since it does not manufacture, own, or sell the products sold via its Fulfilled by Amazon program. Additionally, Amazon argues that since CPSA grants the CPSC authority to issue recall orders only to manufacturers, distributors, or retailers, the agency cannot issue recall orders to the e-commerce giant. 'The Commission brought an administrative lawsuit only against Amazon to expand its authority over online marketplaces,' Amazon claims. While Amazon continues to deny its legal responsibility in the case, consumer safety advocates argue otherwise. 'Instead of demonstrating its commitment to consumer safety, Amazon has fought the CPSC every step of the way for more than three years,' said William Wallace, director of safety advocacy for Consumer Reports. 'It's absurd to suggest that because a company hosts a marketplace online it should be exempt from sensible requirements that help get hazardous products out of people's homes and prevent them from being sold.'
