No. 25-1145October Term 2025Petition Pending
Council For Responsible Nutrition, Petitioner v. Letitia James, in Her Official Capacity as New York Attorney General
The Council for Responsible Nutrition asks the Supreme Court to review a Second Circuit decision allowing New York to restrict sales of dietary supplements to minors when the products are labeled, marketed, or represented for weight loss or muscle building.
Case status
- Current stage
- Petition Pending
- Latest event
- Petition pending
- Decision timing
- No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.
- What it's about
The Council for Responsible Nutrition asks the Supreme Court to review a Second Circuit decision allowing New York to restrict sales of dietary supplements to minors when the products are labeled, marketed, or represented for weight loss or muscle building. The Council argues that the law violates the First Amendment because it restricts truthful commercial speech without sufficient evidence that the restriction will directly advance the state’s interests or that less speech-restrictive options would not work.
Question presented
Whether the courts below correctly applied the test set forth in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 557 (1980), in determining that petitioner had failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on its facial First Amendment challenge to this sales restriction?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / Petition pending
- Area
First Amendment, Business and Regulation
Briefing
What it's about
The Council for Responsible Nutrition asks the Supreme Court to review a Second Circuit decision allowing New York to restrict sales of certain weight-loss and muscle-building dietary supplements to minors. The Council says the restriction limits truthful commercial speech and fails the Central Hudson test for regulating advertising.
Argument
The petition for certiorari (the Court's decision to hear a case) is pending, and oral argument has not been scheduled. The Council argues New York lacks sufficient evidence that the restriction advances its interests or that less speech-restrictive options would not work.
Impact
The case could affect whether a retailer may sell a supplement marketed for weight loss or muscle building to someone under 18 in New York. It also could shape how much evidence states need before restricting commercial marketing to protect minors.
What is at stake in Council for Responsible Nutrition v. James?
The case concerns New York's limits on selling certain weight-loss and muscle-building supplements to minors. It also concerns First Amendment limits on regulating commercial marketing.
Who could be affected by New York's supplement sales restriction?
Minors seeking covered dietary supplements and retailers selling them in New York could be directly affected. Supplement makers and marketers also have an interest in the rule.
What happens next in Council for Responsible Nutrition v. James?
The Supreme Court will consider whether to grant certiorari, meaning agree to hear the case. Oral argument has not yet been scheduled.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Sep 3, 2026
- Method
- Methodology