Alternative Protein Laws State Compilation

Emily Stone, NALC Staff Attorney
Jakob Christopherson, NALC Research Fellow
Emily Whitest, NALC Research Fellow

As technology continues to advance into the food industry, state governments are reacting in a variety of ways to protect consumers and prevent confusion. Specifically, states are passing laws to regulate foods that can be characterized as alternative proteins. Alternative protein is a term typically used to describe a food product that is not derived from harvested livestock but manufactured to mimic a food product that is. This classification encompasses cell-cultured meat, plant-based meat, and insect-based meat. Cell-cultured meat, also called lab-grown meat, is a food product that is produced through the practice of growing livestock stem cells outside an animal and harvesting the cells to make food. Plant-based and insect-based meats are food products derived from plants or insects that are manufactured to look like a traditional meat product. For example, a vegan burger that looks like a traditional burger derived from beef but is made from chickpeas.

The first way states have reacted is by banning cell-cultured meat. Currently, Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, and Texas have passed laws banning cell-cultured meat. These bans vary in scope, but primarily, they ban the sale, manufacturing, and distribution of cell-cultured meat. For instance, Alabama’s law includes a carveout explicitly permitting research by a “federal, state, or local governmental entity or institution of higher education, or a person that is partnered with a governmental entity or institution of higher education.” Texas and Indiana’s laws are temporary bans with Indiana’s lasting until June 30, 2027, and Texas’ until September 1, 2027.

Similar to bans on the sale, manufacturing, or distribution of cell-cultured meats, states have taken action to prohibit certain state agencies from purchasing cell-cultured meat. In an executive order signed by its governor, Nebraska banned any state government actor from purchasing cell-cultured meat. While Iowa, restricted state education entities, like the board of regents (etc.), from purchasing cell-cultured meat. Alternatively, South Dakota has a law that restricts the use of state moneys for research, production, promotion, or sale/distribution of cell-cultured protein, with exceptions for the Board of Regents, its institutions, and state agencies conducting regulatory functions.

Other state legislatures have taken a different approach by supplementing state food labeling laws instead of an outright ban. Twenty-one states have enacted a law that addresses the labeling of alternative proteins. Typically, these labeling laws fall into two categories: either an outright ban on labeling cell-cultured products as “meat” or allowing it with certain requirements. In the case of the latter, these laws usually require the use of qualifying terms or disclaimers. For example, North Dakota requires labels to state “cell-cultured product,” while Georgia requires terms like “lab-created,” “lab-grown,” “vegan,” or “veggie” on the product label. Further, some states only ban the use of a meat term for cell-cultured meat, while others include both cell-cultured and alternative proteins like plant-based or insect-based.

Additionally, these labeling laws invoke questions of First Amendment rights and consequently have been challenged. For example, Arkansas has seen parts of its labeling laws held as unconstitutional under the First Amendment. While states such as Louisiana and Oklahoma’s label laws were held to be constitutional. To learn more about the litigation surrounding these laws, click here to read NALC’s “Truth in Labeling Law(suits)” article series.

Notably, all of these laws have been enacted since 2025. Given factors such as judicial impact, and cell-culture meat technology’s young age, this area of law is likely to change quickly. Thus, these laws are also likely to change both in content and scope. This compilation was last updated on September 9, 2025.

State

 Cell-Cultured Meat Ban? Alternative Protein Labeling Laws?

Citation Research Exception A prohibition against state agencies purchasing cell-cultured meat Citation Outright ban on use of meat term? Can use term, but requires a disclaimer? Which alternative protein does the law apply to? Prohibited Acts

Permitted qualifying or identifying terms?
Alabama Code of Ala. § 20-1-165 Yes n/a Code of Ala. § 2-17-10(d) Yes No Cell-cultured meat Labeling cell-cultured meat as a meat or meat product n/a
Alaska n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Arizona n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Arkansas n/a n/a n/a Ark. Code Ann. §§ 2-1-301 to 306 Yes No cell-cultured meat, plant-based products, insect-based products Misrepresenting an agricultural product as meat or a meat product when the agricultural product is not derived from harvested livestock, poultry, or cervids. n/a
California n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Colorado n/a n/a n/a Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-5-411; 25-5-428 (effective August 6, 2025) No Yes cell-cultivated meat Food processing plant that sells cell-cultivated meat is prohibited from selling product without the label “cell-cultivated meat” “Cell-cultivated,” “cell-cultured,” “grown in a lab,” “imitation,” “lab-created,” “lab-grown,” “meat-free,” “meatless”
Connecticut n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Delaware n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Florida Fla. Stat. § 500.452 It does not have an “exception” but does not state that research on cultivated meat is banned. n/a Fla. Stat. § 500.93 No – requires the creation of regulations if 11 listed states create mandatory labeling requirements for plant-based proteins. No Plant-based protein Selling or offering for sale a product mislabeled as meat, milk, poultry, or egg that does not meet the federal standard of identity. Only goes into effect if 11 of the following states enact mandatory labeling requirements for the listed products: AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MD, MS, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA, WV. n/a
Georgia n/a n/a n/a Ga. Code Ann. § 26-2-152 No Yes Cell-cultured meat, plant-based products Unlawful to label, advertise, or otherwise represent any food produced or sold in this state as meat or any product from an animal unless each product is clearly labeled by displaying a disclaimer on the package such as “lab-grown” or “plant-based” “lab-grown,” “lab-created,” “grown in a lab,” “vegetarian,” “veggie,” “vegan,” “plant-based.”
Hawaii n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Idaho n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Illinois n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Indiana IC 15-17-5-6.1 (only in effect from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2027) no n/a Ind. Code §§ 15-17-2-22.5; 15-17-2-83; Ind. Code §§ 15-17-5-6; 15-17-5-6.5 No (goes into effect after July 1, 2027, when the ban expires) Yes cell-cultured meat A cultivated meat product is misbranded if the food is advertised, labeled, or offered for sale in a manner that doesn’t clearly indicate it is a cultivated meat product. A cultivated meat product must bear the phrase “This is an imitation meat product.”
Iowa n/a n/a State education providers are prohibited from purchasing cell-cultured meat. Iowa Code §§ 260C.10-10A; 262.25d-25e; 283a.12-.13 Iowa Code §§ 137e.1 – 137e.6 No Yes Cultivated-protein food product, insect-protein food product, or plant-protein food product The law prohibits the use of an “identifying meat term” on the package of a manufactured-protein food product unless a “qualifying term” is within close proximity on the package. Identifying term – any word or phrase that indicates a meat product. Iowa Code § 137e.1(6); Qualifying term – a word that discloses to a purchaser that the food product is not a meat product. Iowa Code § 137e.1(13)
Kansas n/a n/a n/a Kan. Stat. Ann. § 65-665 No Yes Any food that approximates the aesthetic qualities, primarily texture, flavor, and appearance, or the chemical characteristics of any specific type of meat, but does not contain any meat. A meat analog is considered misbranded if its labeling utilizes an identifiable meat term without using a disclaimer in a prominent and conspicuous font size, in close proximity to the identifiable meat term. Identifiable meat term = terms such as meat, beef, pork, poultry, chicken, turkey, lamb, goat, jerky, steak, hamburger, etc. Kan. Stat. Ann. § 65-656(ee). Qualifying term = “this product does not contain meat,” “meatless,” “meat-free,” “vegan,” “veggie,” “vegetarian,” “vegetable,” and “plant-based” Kan. Stat. Ann. § 65-665(m)
Kentucky n/a n/a n/a Ky. Rev. Stat. § 217.035 Yes No Cell-cultured meat Representing itself as meat, and contains cultured animal tissue produced from invitro cell cultures outside of the organism from which it is derived. n/a
Louisiana n/a n/a n/a La. Stat. Ann. §§ 3:4741-4746 Yes No Cell-cultured meat, plant-based meat, insect-based meat Considered misbranding to represent a food product as meat or meat product when the food product is not derived from harvested beef, pork, poultry, alligator, farm-raised deer, turtle, domestic rabbit, crawfish, or shrimp carcass. n/a
Maine n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Maryland n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Massachusetts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Michigan n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Minnesota n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Mississippi Miss. Code Ann. § 75-35-15 n/a n/a Miss. Code Ann. § 75-35-3; 75-35-15; Miss. Code Ann. § 75-33-3; 75-33-7 No Yes Cell-cultured meat, plant-based, insect-based A food product containing cell-cultured tissue and a plant-based or insect-based food product is considered misbranded if it is labeled as meat or a meat food product unless it bears a qualifying term. “cell-cultivated,” “cell-cultured,” “fake,” “grown in a lab,” “imitation,” “insect,” “insect-based,” “insect-protein,” “lab-created,” “lab-grown,” “meat-free,” “meatless,” “plant,” “plant-based,” “vegan,” “vegetable,” “vegetarian,” “veggie,” or a comparable word or phrase as approved by the department.
Missouri n/a n/a n/a Mo. Rev. Stat. § 265.494 Yes No Any product not derived from harvested production livestock or poultry Misrepresenting a product as meat that is not derived from harvested production livestock or poultry. No
Montana Mont. Code Ann. §§ 50-31-501 No No n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Nebraska Neb. Rev. Stat. § 81-2,282 No Executive Order No. 24-09. Prohibits state agencies from procuring cell-cultured meat. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Nevada n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
New Hampshire n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
New Jersey n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
New Mexico n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
New York n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
North Carolina n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
North Dakota n/a n/a n/a N.D. Cent. Code Ann. § 19-02.1-12.1 No Yes Cell-cultured meat Cell-cultured meat may not be advertised, offered for sale, sold, or misrepresented as a meat food. Specifically, a cell-cultured food product may not be packaged in the same, or deceptively similar packaging as a meat food product. Deceptively similar is packaging that could mislead a reasonable person to believe the product is a meat food product. No specific term, but a cell-cultured food product must be labeled as such.
Ohio n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Oklahoma n/a n/a n/a Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 1-1150 (effective Nov. 1, 2025) No Yes Cultivated-protein food product, insect-protein food product, or plant-protein food product A manufactured protein food product is deemed to be falsely advertised or misbranded if it is labeled with an identifying meat term without a qualifying term in close proximity. A manufactured protein food product sold in a food establishment is misbranded or falsely advertised if it is not labeled in a manner that is clearly and distinctly separate from any product made from tissue originating from any agricultural food animal. cell-cultivated, cell-cultured, fake, grown in a lab, imitation, insect, insect-based, insect protein, lab-created, lab-grown, meat-free, meatless, plant, plant-based, vegan, vegetable, vegetarian, veggie, or any comparable word or phrase
Oregon n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Pennsylvania n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Rhode Island n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
South Carolina n/a n/a n/a S.C. Code Ann. § 47-17-510 No Yes Cell-cultured meat It is unlawful for artificial for cell-cultured food products to be labeled as beef, poultry, fish, crustacean, or any other animal protein for the purposes of advertising, manufacturing, selling, holding, or offering for sale. No specific term, but “artificial or cell-cultivated food products” must be labeled in a way that indicates it is not beef, poultry, fish, crustacean, or any other animal protein it may resemble.
South Dakota n/a n/a Yes – “no state moneys may be awarded or used, directly or indirectly, for research, production, promotion, or the sale or distribution of cell-cultured protein.” Does not prohibit the award of money or the use of money by an institution under the control of the Board of Regents. S.D. Codified Laws § 39-5-55 S.D. Codified Laws §§ 39-4-26; 39-5-26 Yes No for “meat not derived from a live animal”, but yes for “cell-cultivated.” A meat food product, meat by-product, or poultry product which is not derived from a live animal, but misrepresents itself as it is, and cell-cultured protein. A food is deemed misbranded if the product is labeled or branded in a false, deceptive, or misleading manner that intentionally misrepresents the product as a meat food product, a meat by-product, or as poultry. A cell-cultured protein is also misbranded if it does not clearly state the words
“cell-cultured” or “lab-grown” on the package.		 Specifically for cell-cultured proteins, “cell-cultured” or “lab-grown”.
Tennessee n/a n/a Tenn. Code Ann. § 53-1-120 – Not a ban but does create a program for issuing a permit to sellers of cell-cultured meat. Tennessee Agriculture Department will be required to promulgate regulations that establish a fee, a review and approval process, and criteria for approval. Tenn. Code Ann. § 53-1-102; 53-1-119 No A cell-cultured food product must not be labeled as “meat” or a “meat food product,” but is permitted to bear a label indicating the species from which the cells for the cell-cultured product were harvested. Also, can say that the product was intended as a substitute for meat or poultry or another similar description. Cell-cultured food product If a cell-cultured food product is labeled as meat or meat food product then it is considered misbranded. Can indicate which species the cells came from, and permits language clarifying the product is intended as a substitute for meat or poultry.
Texas Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 433.057 – temporary ban that only lasts until September 1, 2027. n/a n/a Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 431.082 No Yes Analogue product (plant-based, insect-based, fungus-based) An analogue product is deemed misbranded unless its label bears in prominent type equal to or greater in size than the surrounding type and in close proximity to the name of the product a qualifying term or disclaimer that communicates the contents of the product to a consumer. “analogue”, “meatless”, “plant-based”, “made from plants”, or a similar qualifying term or disclaimer
Utah n/a n/a Utah Code § 4-5-301 – not a ban but does require food establishments to notify the state if it plans to sell, hold, or offer for sale, or distribute a cultivated meat product or plant- or insect-based meat substitute. The food establishment must agree to an inspection for compliance and pay a fee. Utah Code § 4-5-102; 4-5-201 No Yes Cultivated meat product, plant-based meat substitute, insect-based meat substitute. Misbranded if food contains cultivated, insect-based, or plant-based meat substitutes and does not notify consumers in a reasonably certain way. No specific term mentioned but must bear a term or phrase that is reasonably certain to notify a consumer that the food contains a cultivated meat product, plant-based meat substitute, or insect-based substitute.
Vermont n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Virginia n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Washington n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
West Virginia n/a n/a n/a W.Va. Code §§ 19-39-1 to 3 No Yes Analogue product (plant-based, insect-based, fungus-based); cell-cultured meat A product is misbranded if it is an analogue or cell-cultured product that does not bear a qualifying term or disclaimer that clearly communicates the contents of the product to a consumer. “analogue”, “meatless”, “plant-based”, “made from plants”, “cell-cultured”, “lab-grown”, or a similar qualifying term or disclaimer
Wisconsin n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Wyoming n/a n/a n/a Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 35-7-119 No Yes Cell-cultured and plant-based A cell-cultured or plant-based product may not use the term “meat” without an accompanying qualifying term on its label “containing cell-cultured product,” “vegetarian,” “veggie,” “vegan,” “plant-based”