Will States Take Lab-Grown Meat off the Table

Will States Take Lab-Grown Meat off the Table?

Lawmakers are weighing benefits such as sustainability and animal welfare against concerns over consumer transparency and impacts on traditional agriculture.

Lawmakers are weighing how meat produced by cultivating animal cells in a lab, rather than through conventional livestock operations, should be regulated as products move closer to market. (Credit: Anna Stills/Getty Images)

As food technology advances, so does the debate over laboratory-grown meat.

Lawmakers are weighing how meat produced by cultivating animal cells in a lab, rather than through conventional livestock operations, should be regulated as products move closer to market. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration oversee food safety and inspection, with the states retaining authority over food labeling, sales and consumer protection.

Proponents of lab-grown, or cultivated, meat cite potential benefits, including sustainability, reduced risk of pathogens and animal welfare. Critics raise questions about consumer transparency, regulatory oversight and impacts on traditional agricultural producers such as ranchers and livestock operations.

In the absence of a uniform federal approach, lawmakers in 18 states have introduced 30 bills this year that would prohibit sales, tighten labeling requirements, restrict public procurement or expand enforcement authority. Some states have opted for studies examining how cultivated meat fits within existing food regulatory frameworks.

State Responses

Several states have taken a hard line against lab-grown meat. Florida (SB 1084; 2024), Alabama (SB 23; 2024), Texas (SB 261; 2025) and Montana (HB 401; 2025) have adopted measures that bar the sale or distribution of meat produced from lab-grown animal cells, often accompanied by civil or criminal penalties. And a new South Dakota law (HB 1118; 2025) restricts the use of public funds for the purchase of cultivated meat products and prohibits public institutions from researching them.

Other states have taken on labeling and misbranding rather than banning products outright. Colorado (HB 1203; 2025) enacted legislation requiring lab-grown meat to be clearly labeled and prohibited its sale as conventional meat. Iowa (SB 2391; 2024), Mississippi (HB 913; 2025), South Dakota (HB 1022; 2025) and Utah have adopted similar laws that require the use of qualifying terms, such as "cell-cultivated" or "lab-grown," and authorize state agencies to inspect products or investigate complaints of misbranding.

A smaller number of states are focusing on study and regulatory review. Illinois (HB 3710; 2024) created an Alternative Protein Innovation Task Force to examine plant-based, fermented and lab-grown proteins and develop policy recommendations on innovation and regulation. North Dakota (HB 1151; 2025) lawmakers authorized a study to assess the regulatory landscape, stakeholder impacts and the feasibility of adopting a prohibition.

As federal approvals advance and products move closer to market, state legislatures are likely to remain active in shaping how lab-grown meat is regulated within their borders.

Tom Klein is a policy associate in NCSL's Environment, Energy and Transportation Program; he also staffs NCSL's Agriculture Task Force.