Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund monitors, advises, and works to influence hundreds of food freedom bills and policies across the country that align with our mission. We’ve been tracking their progress and engaging with legislators and our members to lend our support to efforts to expand food freedom. Below is the progress to date on some of the most influential legislation and policies we are working to advance. If you wish to see the text of any bill below or read more about its progress through the legislature, visit our online Policy Tracker and follow the links provided.

While some state legislative sessions have closed, others remain open, even if only for several more weeks.

Passed Into Law

Colorado HB 1033: Expands the “Colorado Cottage Foods Act” to allow sales of homemade foods requiring time and temperature control, including those containing USDA-inspected meat, such as tamales and burritos. Producers may sell only one type of these products (and up to 5 varieties) and must register with the state, follow temperature and labeling requirements, and take a food safety course. Small egg producers can sell up to 250 dozen eggs per month subject to certain requirements. The cottage food revenue cap will be adjusted annually for inflation, from $10,000 to $150,000. Effective June 4, 2026, though some provisions may not be effective until 2027.

Idaho SB 1283: Implements the Direct-to-Consumer Act to allow sales of homemade shelf-stable and perishable food products except certain meat products (though animal share agreements are permitted), subject to labeling, recordkeeping, and other requirements. Prevents local licensing and other requirements that are more strict than state and federal rules. Producers can use a designated agent to deliver products, and sales can occur at farm stands, farms, producers’ homes, cooperative or consignment markets, and commercial food establishments (if kept separate from other products). Effective March 20, 2026.

Indiana HB 1424: Significantly revises regulations for small producers by establishing new definitions for “homestead vendor” and “small farm” (entities with gross sales up to $1.5 million annually) and prohibits local entities from imposing requirements not already mandated by federal law. Provides sales channels, product labeling, and opportunities to ship products to customers. Also exempts public buildings used by these vendors from certain building regulations. Effective July 1, 2026.

Kentucky SB 73: Adds tallow-based cosmetic products to the definition of “home-based processor.” Effective April 8, 2026.

Maryland HB 0272: Modifies existing law to allow certain food establishments involved in agritourism (Class 4 limited wineries and Class 8 farm breweries) to use a portable toilet that meets specific requirements to satisfy the lavatory requirement. Effective July 1, 2026.

Maryland HB 0535: Expands the annual revenue allowed for cottage food businesses from $50,000 to $100,000. Effective October 1, 2026.

Michigan HB 4122: Expands the annual revenue allowed for the sale of non-potentially hazardous cottage foods to $50,000, and to $75,000 where a product is sold at a price of $250 or more per unit. These limits are set until October 1, 2026, and then may be adjusted for inflation. Also allows cottage food sales by internet or mail order and via a third-party delivery platform, subject to certain requirements. Effective March 24, 2026.

Nebraska LB 525: Implements a first-of-its-kind Agricultural Data Privacy Act to safeguard agricultural data and require data controllers to establish security practices and sign consent agreements with producers before using or selling agricultural data, defined as land, agronomic, weather, livestock, sustainability, and management data. It ensures that producers retain control over the digital footprint created by their own machinery. Core provisions take effect July 17, 2026; other contract and AI provisions become effective January and July 2027.

Oklahoma SB 2028: The Oklahoma Milk and Milk Products Act has been amended to allow for unlicensed sales of raw milk and raw milk products such as cheese from the farm, and increases the limit for “incidental sales” from 100 gallons to 1,500 gallons per month. Advertising is allowed, and a state-approved warning label is required on all containers. Sales off the farm and above the volume limits still require a license. Effective May 7, 2026.

Oklahoma HB 3720: The “Local Food Freedom Act” is created to allow any home business, excluding restaurants, to produce and sell local food products without a license if annual revenues don’t exceed $250,000. Excludes alcoholic beverages, raw milk, cannabis products, and products containing meat, seafood, or poultry. Non-time- or temperature-controlled foods can be sold directly to the consumer in person, via the internet or phone, and through a designated agent, such as a retail or grocery store or farmers market. For sales of time or temperature-controlled foods, an agent or third-party delivery service cannot be used. A producer of time/temperature-controlled foods must complete a food safety training course. Labeling is also required. Effective November 1, 2026.

Oregon HB 4153: This law allows farmers to host agritourism events on their farms and to expand retail sales. Establishes an allowance for “farm stores” as a permitted use on land zoned for farm use and allows sales of products produced by that farm as well as those of other local producers. The store may include an on-site kitchen. Effective January 1, 2027.

South Carolina H 5097: Amends state law to clarify that certain roadside markets on farm property selling that farm’s products direct to the public may not be classified as commercial operations for local zoning purposes and are exempt from specific local and state regulations. Effective May 15, 2026.

South Dakota HB 1064: Allows producers to sell meat direct to consumers if the animals were raised by the producer for at least ninety days and slaughtered and processed within the state at a “custom exempt plant.” The sale can occur at the producer’s residence, a farmers market, a roadside stand, or another temporary venue, as long as the packaging states that the meat has not been inspected. Will not take effect until federal law legalizes such sales of uninspected meat.

Utah HB 179: Raw milk and product producers selling direct to the consumer from their property no longer need a state permit but must notify the state of their intent to sell. Producers may designate an agent to deliver to their customers. Permits are still required for sales at any state-inspected retail establishment. Testing, labeling, cooling, and other requirements apply. There is a further exemption from testing and other requirements for producers who produce less than 500 gallons of raw milk per month and sell raw milk or raw milk products directly from the farm; notification to the state is still required. Effective May 6, 2026.

Utah SB 0217: Local Food Amendments allows a designated agent to sell and deliver a homemade product on behalf of a producer and allows a direct-to-sale farmers market to sell unlicensed and uninspected homemade products. Effective May 6, 2026.

Virginia HB 402: Expands the cottage food sales venues for certain products, including pickles and other acidified vegetables, to include online and phone sales; delivery is allowed by mail or delivery service. A working group has been established to examine the structural, equipment, and facility standards for homemade food producers who do not qualify for exemptions from the code’s inspection and permitting requirements. Findings are to be reported by November 1, 2026.

West Virginia SB 44: Amends current law to allow homemade food producers to sell perishable, potentially hazardous, and acidified foods (except meat, poultry, and dairy products) direct to consumers if they obtain a cottage food vendor permit and pass inspection. Effective June 12, 2026.

In Progress

Alaska SB 226: Adds a prohibition on cottage food vendors selling potentially hazardous foods in reduced oxygen packaging. In committee.

California SB 881: Seeks to establish tax credits for those who donate fresh fruits, vegetables, and certain processed foods to California food banks. In committee.

California AB 2315: Seeks to amend existing law to require local governments to grant a nondiscretionary permit to use a residence as a Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operation (MEHKO) and essentially adopt MEHKO statewide, removing county/city opt-in. In committee.

California AB 2646: Seeks to raise the minimum wage for “approved agricultural employees” and “corresponding employees” to $19.75 an hour starting in 2027. In committee.

Hawaii SB 2742 and HB 2152: Seeks to address owner liability and increased penalties and enforcement mechanisms for dog attacks on livestock. In committee.

Hawaii SB 1251 and HB 966: Seeks to establish uniform standards to promote agricultural tourism activities in all counties that have adopted an agricultural tourism ordinance. Requires agricultural tourism activities to be registered and to terminate when the agricultural activity with which they coexisted terminates. In committee.

Louisiana HB 347 and HB 403: Both bills seek to modify existing law to increase the annual sales limit for a home-based preparer of low-risk foods. HB 347 seeks to raise the amount from $30,000 to $100,000 and is currently in committee. HB 403 seeks to raise it from $30,000 to $50,000 and has passed through the House and the Senate but was amended in the Senate to change $50,000 to $100,000, ultimately matching HB 347. The bill is scheduled for concurrence.

Louisiana HB 753: Seeks to exempt certain meat products from state inspection if the producer sells the meat raised from their animals to informed individuals. Producers would still need to process meat at licensed custom slaughter facilities and would also need to label meat and disclose to consumers that the products are not for resale and have not been inspected. In committee.

Massachusetts S 69: Seeks to define cottage/homemade foods that do not require a permit and establish pre-operational inspection for foods where permits are required. Also clarifies product warning and labeling requirements. In joint committee.

Massachusetts H 5241 (replacing H 114 and 140): Seeks to establish home-based food business regulations that allow the direct sale of non-time and temperature-controlled homemade products through various channels, exempting them from most permitting, licensing, inspection, packaging, and labeling requirements. The House ordered that the Committee on Agriculture and Fisheries study the bills and report its results and recommendations on or before December 31, 2026.

Michigan HB 5217, HB 5218, HB 5219: Seeks to allow the sale of raw milk and raw milk products direct to customers by a producer or their designated agent, subject to notification to the state of intent to sell, obtaining of customer waiver, recordkeeping, testing, labeling, and other standards. Resides in House.

New Hampshire HB 396: Allows for a limited number of livestock to be processed each month by a producer at a custom processing facility and for the resulting meat to be sold to the consumer from the farm, a farm stand, farmers markets, or to a licensed restaurant. Certain labeling, meat handling, recordkeeping, refrigeration, and other requirements must be met. Passed House and Senate and should now move to the governor’s desk.

New Hampshire HB 1186: Seeks to amend the state egg law to require producers who sell from their home or farmstand to label their eggs; exempts such egg producers from requirements for sorting, selling, and grading eggs. Passed House and Senate and awaiting final sign-off.

New Hampshire HB 1253: Seeks to exempt livestock guard dogs from nuisance status when engaged in farm work. Passed House and Senate and awaiting final sign-off.

New Hampshire HB 1766: Seeks to prohibit the confiscation of animals when abuse is suspected unless there is a formal charge of cruelty or the animals require temporary protective custody. Would require the state veterinarian to accompany an investigating officer and set probable cause criteria for taking the animal. Passed House and Senate and awaiting final sign-off, though humane societies are petitioning the governor to veto.

New Hampshire SB 418: Seeks to prohibit municipalities from requiring licenses for the production and sale of homestead food products. Passed House and Senate and awaiting final sign-off.

New Hampshire HB 1647: Seeks to require all local governments to adopt new rules for assessing farm structures with the goal of preserving productive farms and supporting agricultural economic viability. Referred for further study.

New Hampshire SB 637: Seeks to establish a tax credit program to incentivize grocery stores to purchase agricultural products from local farms. Referred for further study.

New Jersey S 912: Seeks to allow a producer to use, or sell to a third party to use, ground-harvested fruit to produce alcohol, cider, baked goods, or other value-added products if appropriately treated to destroy microorganisms that might cause disease, spoilage, or undesirable fermentation. In committee.

New Jersey S 920: Seeks to permit the sale of raw milk under certain conditions and establishes a raw milk permit program. In committee.

New York AB 630: Seeks to prohibit the tethering, restraining, caging, or penning of working or non-working dogs outdoors between the hours of 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. and sets requirements for pen/cage size. In committee.

New York SB 950 and A652: Seeks to require a producer of shell eggs or liquid eggs for human consumption to confine egg-laying hens in a cage-free housing system. In committee.

New York S5683 and A668: Seeks restrictions on the tethering and confinement of food-producing animals in a manner that prevents such animals from lying down, standing up, fully extending their limbs, and turning around freely. In committee.

New York A5836: Would exempt the production and sale of certain homegrown food products from certain food processing licensure requirements where the food is sold directly to consumers and total sales do not exceed $12,500. In committee.

New York A6589: Would expand the definition of “agricultural tourism” by adding several new activities and production methods farmers can offer to the public. In committee.

New York S 1824: Seeks to allow farm breweries, cideries, wineries, and distilleries to sell “farm brewed” alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption. In committee.

New York A 185: Would exempt livestock guardian dogs and herding dogs from license fees. In committee.

North Carolina S 1081: Seeks to amend the state constitution to create a constitutional right to engage in farming and forestry, which includes activities like growing crops, raising livestock, producing dairy and honey, and harvesting timber. In committee.

Ohio HB 134: Seeks to allow “microenterprise home kitchen operations” for the preparation and sale of certain homemade food items pursuant to registration, annual fee, inspection, and food safety standards. In committee.

Oklahoma HB 3056, SB 2027, SB 2071, SB 2125: These bills each seek changes to raw milk laws in various ways: expanding the types of raw milk that could be sold incidentally, additional sales avenues, and allowing for advertising. All have stalled except SB 2028, which was signed into law. See the summary of SB 2028 in the Passed Into Law section above.

Oklahoma HB 3124: Sought to prevent the state Department of Agriculture from requiring electronic ear tags on livestock as mandated by the USDA, and instead work with other states that regulate livestock to create agreements, or “compacts,” that would permit the sale of livestock without the tags between participating states. In committee.

Rhode Island H 7742 and S 2506: Seeks to add pickles and relish to those foods not requiring refrigeration which are permitted to be manufactured and sold as a homemade food product. The Health Committee recommended that the bill be referred for further study.

Failed

Alaska SB 226: Attempted to amend state law to allow cottage food vendors to sell potentially hazardous foods in reduced oxygen packaging. Died in committee.

Alabama HB 175: Known as the “Farm-to-Food Bank Act of 2026,” this bill sought to establish an income tax credit for farmers or owners of food establishments who donate edible farm products to qualifying food banks. Died in committee.

Arizona HB 2646: Sought to amend state laws on pesticides and fertilizer by introducing several key provisions to prohibit substances containing PFAS. Died in committee.

Florida S 1210, H793, SJR 278, SJR 274: All these bills sought state constitutional amendments to revise and ease property tax rules on homestead properties. All died in committee.

Florida HB 433 and SB 290: Companion bills sought various protections related to agriculture, the most significant of which sought to provide a cause of action for agricultural producers to recover damages for disparaging and false statements made about any agricultural product. Language on this in an early draft was later stricken and consideration of these bills was suspended.

Georgia HB 228: Sought to establish the Georgia Farmstead Relief Act. While the bill would have increased the kinds of products small dairy farmers could produce on farm and sell (such as cheese, butter, and ice cream), it sought requirements such as a dairy manufacturer’s license, mandating pasteurization of all milk used in production, subjecting farmsteads to inspections, and penalties for violations including misdemeanor charges and potential license revocation. Died in the House.

Idaho HB 526: Sought to amend existing law to allow certain cottage food operations to sell “time/temperature control for safety foods” directly to consumers. Passed the House but died in the Senate.

Iowa SF 2112: Sought to reverse provisions enacted in 2023 allowing for the production and sale of raw milk and raw milk products, subject to certain restrictions. Died in committee.

Iowa HF 2444: Sought to create an event permit for farm-to-table meals, expand the permissible sales of raw milk, and allow cottage foods to be sold in grocery stores. Died in committee.

Iowa SF 2420: Sought several reforms to state agricultural laws ranging from creating a butchery revitalization program to support small producers, increases in hauling limits for milk, and expansion of liability protections for agricultural tourism operations. Died in committee.

Kentucky HB 348: Sought to allow certain exempted poultry processors to sell to end consumers on a farm, at a farmers market, or at a roadside stand. Died in committee.

Kentucky SB 45: Sought to amend the definition of “agritourism activity,” define “working animal,” prohibit municipalities from restricting agritourism activity, and require that an agritourism activity comply with public health and safety requirements. Passed Senate but died in House Agriculture Committee.

Maryland SB 838: Sought to alter the definition of “cottage food product,” reduce the licensing requirements for a home bakery, and apply certain provisions of law governing cottage food businesses to home bakeries. Died in committee.

Mississippi SB 2284: Sought to revise current law to add cow and sheep milk to goat milk incidental sales allowance on the farm. Died in committee.

Mississippi SB 2281: Sought to create custom slaughter exemptions when processing livestock without full regulatory oversight as long as producers allow customers to inspect and select their animal. Animals presented for slaughter could have multiple owners. Died in committee.

Mississippi SB 2394, 2398 and 2283, and HB 910: Sought to increase the annual sales allowed for cottage food makers to $120,000 and to increase the allowable sales avenues. Died in committee.

Mississippi HB 785: Sought to create a state On-Farm Sales and Food Freedom Act to limit the ability of local governments to regulate certain agricultural practices and direct sales of farm products. Also sought to allow for the incidental sale of raw cow milk in addition to raw goat milk. Died in committee.

Missouri HB 2814: Sought to establish a state Food Freedom to Farm Act to provide broad protections for farmers and ranchers and prevent government intervention in agricultural practices. Died in committee.

Missouri HB 3108: Sought to expand allowances for homemade food producers. Died in committee.

Ohio HB 406: The Farm-to-Consumer Access to Raw Milk Act sought to regulate the sale of raw milk by creating two primary licensing categories for raw milk sales: raw milk retailers (for human consumption) and raw milk feed retailers (for animal consumption). We believe this effort died in the Agriculture Committee.

Rhode Island H 7742: Attempted to include pickles and relish among those foods not requiring refrigeration which are allowed to be manufactured and sold as a cottage food product. Measure held for further study.

South Dakota HB 1121: Sought to allow the sale of raw milk at a farmers market and a retail store owned by the milk producer but not located on the farm itself. Withdrawn.

Tennessee HJR 0780: Sought a state constitutional amendment establishing the right to food that includes the right for residents to grow, raise, harvest, produce, and acquire and consume the food of their own choosing. Died in committee.

Virginia HB 699: Sought to expand the sales of homemade food direct to consumer of any food without inspection as long as labeling requirements and sales venue restrictions are followed. Died in committee.

Washington HB 2129: Sought to support agritourism activities by establishing clear legal protections and guidelines for agricultural businesses. Died in committee.

Washington SB 5605: Sought to allow microenterprise home kitchens to prepare meals to be consumed by customers offsite, including via catering services. Introduced but did not progress.

Washington HB 2703: Sought to expand the types of cottage food products considered to be potentially nonhazardous. Died in committee.

West Virginia HB 4498: Sought to strengthen the state Right to Farm Act by expanding protections to “residential agricultural lands” and promoting “urban agriculture,” and clarifying that agricultural operations are not considered a nuisance unless they cause actual physical damage and have existed for less than a year, or if they materially violate federal, state, or local laws. Died in committee.

Wisconsin SB 739 and AB 748: Sought to exempt homemade producers making pickled fruits and vegetables, baked goods, and other shelf-stable foods from licensing requirements. Failed to pass.

Although many state legislative sessions have come to an end, if a bill dies in committee, dies in session, or is vetoed by the governor, please remember that it is possible for the bill to be reintroduced in a future legislative session, so your opportunity to engage in the process and lend your support continues throughout the year. If you are aware of additional policy issues this year that you feel are important and would like to bring to our attention, please feel free to email us at christine@farmtoconsumer.org with details.

The post Legislative Progress on Food Freedom Bills Show There Is Strength in Numbers appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

While this bill seeking to allow the sale of raw milk might seem to move the needle in the right direction, many rightfully raised concerns about the permit requirement and additional proposals to have producers enroll in a milk quality production program, obtain liability waivers from their customers, and perform monthly testing, among others. All of these would have added unnecessary, costly, and restrictive hurdles for small producers.

Several of our members in Ohio quickly jumped into action, alerted other producers, and reached out to their representatives and state legislators, including some on the Agriculture Committee and the House majority leader, to address their concerns and seek amendments to the proposal. We also canvassed our Ohio members about the bill and received valuable feedback on how we could best represent their interests in our policy efforts.

By October 2025, we learned that one of the two bill sponsors had withdrawn her support and asked that the bill not move forward at all. It was, we hoped, a dead bill.

Unfortunately, we recently learned that the bill was revived and reintroduced this March. It had also been revised and included new language seeking to require anyone operating a raw milk herd share to register with the state. Again, our members jumped into action, made calls, and were ultimately informed by the Office of the Agriculture Committee that there were no plans to move the bill forward, and it was effectively dead.

We wanted to share this story with all our members to illustrate the power of advocacy. With little effort, our producer members in Ohio were able to change the course of this bill and were prepared to mobilize their producer and advocacy communities to take action if it had progressed further. These members let their voices be heard and proved that grassroots advocacy efforts have real value and get results!

We call on all our members to monitor legislative activity in their state and to speak up and get involved in shaping the laws that govern their farming activities. We are always ready to guide our members and assist them in achieving their policy goals. Read our policy primer here to learn more about the policy work that we do and how you can help advocate for food freedom!

The post Ohio Members Stop Problematic Raw Milk Bill in Its Tracks appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

A version of the Farm Bill put forth by the House Agriculture Committee has moved forward recently and, if passed, would reauthorize certain USDA programs for the next 5 years (the last reauthorization was in 2018). The Committee voted in early March to pass the Bill and it will now go before the full House, then to the Senate. It will not be an easy road ahead as some in the Senate have already indicated deep concerns with certain provisions, including those involving pesticide labeling. Let’s take a closer look at some of the key sections of interest to our members.

Conservation: The proposed Bill includes improvements in conservation programs, and the preservation of land conservation funding that supports programs key to agricultural stability, including support for cover crops, no-till practices, water and air quality improvements, and similar practices that create more resilient farmland. While the support for conservation is encouraging, the increased focus on costly precision agricultural practices and related technical tools and solutions could further burden small producers and move food production away from traditional farming practices toward increased automation. Also, while the Bill contains a federal match of state and tribal conservation expenditures proposal, which would boost and expand state programs created in recent years to help reduce the impact of earlier federal cuts, the proposed new grant program may in fact slow the flow of conservation money to farmers due to the time it will take to stand up the program and because the resources to manage it may be limited.

Financial Assistance and Insurance: Operating loans and farm ownership borrowing limit increases have been proposed as well as increases on the borrowing limits for guaranteed loans. Credit availability will broaden, and requirements for accessing credit, such as lowering the level of farming experience needed to apply, will ease if the Bill is passed, especially for new and young farmers. Additionally, “specialty crop (produce)” insurance has been strengthened to help producers better adjust to market changes, and catastrophe proposals would provide assistance when crops are impacted by severe weather and similar disruptions. What has not been adequately addressed, however, are the many hurdles producers face navigating the complicated and time-consuming paperwork and processes required to access the vital insurance.

Meat Processing: We have been following and supporting the Prime Act for some time and are gratified that the Bill seeks to permit a pilot program that would allow producers who have their livestock processed at a custom exempt facility to sell the resulting meat to customers anywhere in their state. Currently, custom processed meat can only be distributed to owners who purchase shares of a live animal before slaughter. This would dramatically open up meat sales for small producers. On a related note, hoped-for changes, increased expansion, and funding of the Cooperative Interstate Shipment Program did not materialize beyond a proposal to further promote the program. Among other things, this program has allowed meat products from state-inspected facilities to be sold across state lines in states where their meat inspection program is equivalent to the federal program. The failure to materially improve the program reduces opportunities for small producers, and local meat choices for consumers.

Pesticide Labeling: A number of states are grappling with this issue in bills put forth during their legislative sessions that seek to strengthen pesticide warning label requirements. The Farm Bill proposes a national warning label for use by all pesticide producers, and would block states’ ability to require stronger warnings, effectively shielding manufacturers and preventing “failure-to-warn” lawsuits if the warning matches federal labeling requirements. A related issue is pending before the Supreme Court.

SNAP Cuts: Unfortunately, the cuts made to this and other nutrition programs as a result of the One Big Beautiful Bill have not been addressed in this version of the Farm Bill, a failure that will continue to hurt the food insecure in innumerable ways for years to come. While the Bill does seek to create a local food purchasing program that would strengthen local economies, help meet the fresh food nutritional needs of insecure communities, and provide greater food distribution avenues for producers, it is not clear whether there will be sufficient funding to properly support such a program.

PFAS: The proposed Farm Bill recognizes the danger PFAS contamination has on farmland and has made research on the impact on food and soil, and potential solutions, a priority. What the Bill so far fails to do, however, is address the impact on farmers already impacted by contamination and does not offer financial or other support to them.

FTCLDF will continue to monitor the progress of the Bill on behalf of our members and take action as needed to support what works and push back on what has the potential to hurt the farmers and small food producers we champion, their customers, and the land they work so hard to steward with such care and devotion.

The post Farm Bill Update – April 2026 appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

The post Hotline Blotter & Legal Roundup: April 2026 appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

But essentially, the DOH alerted the public in a press release last summer that several illnesses were “linked to” (not “caused by”) raw milk from Keely’s Family Farms, milk labeled “not for human consumption.” (It is worth noting that Keely Family Farms holds an animal feed license and produces milk as animal feed, as permitted by Florida law, and not for human consumption.)

Yet the DOH made these assertions that the milk caused illnesses without having conducted a thorough investigation. The agency failed to visit the farm, issued no formal notice of violation against the farm, or took any steps to shut down production or sales. Subsequently, a Florida resident filed a personal injury lawsuit against the farm, relying solely on the statements made by the DOH to allege injuries caused by the farm’s milk.

The post Farm Attacked through Negative Press, Apparently Not Proof appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

On August 13, 2025, relying solely on this press release from DOH, a plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit against Keely Family Farms. The suit alleged illness caused from the Farm’s raw milk produced as animal feed. The complaint specifically references statements made in the DOH release.  

Although the lawsuit was filed in August and received press attention at that time, it was not actually served until immediately prior to Christmas 2025 — and only after the court informed the plaintiff that they had 30 days to do so following a court order. 

The post Update: Keely Family Farms Speaks Out appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

The new law will be effective on March 24, 2026.

In addition to sales by the producer direct to the consumer, it will allow in-state sales to consumers by internet, mail order, or delivery through a third-party food delivery platform, as long as the producer provides an opportunity for consumers to directly interact with the producer before the sale. Sales by consignment or at wholesale are prohibited. 

The annual sales limit has also been raised to $50,000, though if the producer sells products at a price of $250.00 or more per unit, the gross annual sales limit is $75,000.00. After October 1, 2026, these limits will be adjusted for inflation.

The post New Cottage Food Law in Michigan appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

The post Farm Groups Launch National Week of Action for LOCAL Foods Act appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

A major challenge for meat produced in the U.S. is that federal inspection facilities are few and far between. 

The LOCAL Foods Act clarifies the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), which exempts meat intended for personal use from the requirement for federal inspection.

The Act makes clear that livestock owners can legally have their animals slaughtered on the farm or ranch by the person of their choice for their personal and household use.

This would allow consumers to purchase livestock from a local farm or ranch, and then designate an agent to slaughter and process their meat. 

The post LOCAL Foods Act Week of Action! appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.

Together, we achieved fulfilling accomplishments and faced some of our greatest challenges: from protecting Maine’s Food Sovereignty Law to defending small farms in Michigan.

Along with allies, FTCLDF submitted written objections to the proposed Framework for Salmonella in Raw Poultry, which the USDA later withdrew.

We worked with members in Ohio to prevent negative changes to the use of herdshares, and worked with members to support the improvements to on-farm poultry processing and sales. 

Improved food sovereignty in Maine

FTCLDF supported Kenduskeag Kitchen in litigation against the Maine Department of Health and Human Services, challenging its costly commercial kitchen licensing requirement that violated the Maine Food Sovereignty Law. The case led to Maine LD 124, which explicitly allows meals prepared in home kitchens to be sold directly to consumers and affirms local communities’ right to uphold traditional foodways.

Prevailed in a state court appellate case in Michigan

In early 2025, FTCLDF attorney Michelle Halley won a Michigan appellate case. Finding that Cottonwood Farm engaged in commercial activity, which required consideration of the Michigan Right to Farm Act, the court overturned the lower court’s decision. 

Expanded our resources

FTCLDF expanded its library of public educational resources and continues to add new tools to empower farmers, food producers, and members. This year, we hosted webinars on land access, agriculture policy trends, and legal considerations for farm and homestead animals; published articles on key topics like RFID tag requirements, raw milk testing, and litigation updates; and launched new website features, including an “FTCLDF in the News” section and our latest newsletter. 

Served members and stakeholders

FTCLDF’s capacity for legal and member services continues to grow: As of September 2025, our team engaged in over 3,400 interactions with members, donors, and stakeholders. This represents nearly 700 unique legal matters — including 344 dairy and herdshare consultations, around 200 involving eggs, meat, or cottage foods, and about 50 related to business, zoning, or livestock guardian dogs — along with nearly 50 emergency calls for urgent on-farm or criminal issues. 

Advanced food freedom policies

FTCLDF helped advance legal changes in at least 21 states to expand opportunities for small producers, improving local sales of eggs, raw milk, poultry, and cottage foods. 

Increase policy efforts

FTCLDF will continue working hard towards passage of policies like the LOCAL Foods Act and the PRIME Act.

Enhance member representation & resources

As we grow in size, our member needs grow too! We’ll expand resources to empower them with the tools and knowledge they need to grow their businesses and push for local, state, and federal policy changes. We may even add to our team to assist members more efficiently. 

Expand public interest litigation

We are particularly excited to work with our new partner 501(c)(3) nonprofit Food of Choice, Inc: formed to protect the fundamental rights of individuals and communities to grow, raise, produce, prepare, and share the foods they choose. Food of Choice will focus on education and funding public interest litigation. Sign up to stay in the loop!

The post Year-End Fundraiser: Our Food. Our Freedom. Our Future. appeared first on Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund.