MAHA and Its Possible Effects on the Food Industry

Introduction

Shortly after Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was confirmed as the U.S. Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the White House issued an executive order (EO) creating the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission.¹ Sec. Kennedy has consistently used the phrase “Make America Healthy Again,” whether for his presidential campaign or on the campaign trail with President Trump, to signify his desire to conduct major reforms that he believes will make Americans healthier. One of the primary targets in Sec. Kennedy’s MAHA campaign has been the food industry, which he believes has contributed to the decrease in health outcomes for Americans. He has previously stated that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has waged a “war” with public health and that, if he were to be confirmed, entire departments of FDA would be let go.² This Advisory summarizes pertinent provisions in the MAHA EO that relate to the food industry and details the potential and anticipated effects that could arise from the MAHA Commission.

Summary of the Relevant MAHA Provisions

The EO contextualizes the need to “Make America Healthy Again” by identifying Americans’ shorter life expectancy and higher prevalence in the number of diagnoses of cancer, asthma, autism, and autoimmune diseases in the United States in comparison to other countries. The EO also focuses on the health of American children claiming that “eighteen percent of late adolescents and young adults have fatty liver disease, close to 30 percent of adolescents are prediabetic, and more than 40 percent of adolescents are overweight or obese.”

Against this backdrop, the EO takes the position that in order for Americans to address the “growing health crisis in America” there needs to be “fresh thinking on nutrition, physical activity, healthy lifestyle … and food and drug quality and safety.” While the EO does not detail specific policy goals, the EO does state that federally funded health research “should avoid or eliminate conflicts of interest,” and that National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other health-related research “should prioritize gold-standard research on the root causes of why Americans are getting sick.” Additionally, the EO directs agencies to “work with farmers to ensure that United States food is the healthiest … in the world.”

The EO creates a MAHA Commission which will be comprised of the heads of various agencies, including the FDA, NIH, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with the MAHA Commission chaired by the Secretary of HHS. The initial mission of the MAHA Commission will be “to address the childhood chronic disease crisis.” Stated goals for the MAHA Commission include studying “the scope of the childhood chronic disease crisis and any potential contributing causes, including the American diet, absorption of toxic materials, medical treatments, lifestyles, environmental factors, Government policies, food production techniques, electromagnetic radiation, and corporate influence or cronyism.” The EO also directs the MAHA Commission to submit to the president within 100 days a “Make Our Children Healthy Again Assessment” which shall, among other things:

• “[I]dentify and describe childhood chronic disease in America compared to other countries”
• “[E]valuate the effectiveness of existing educational programs with regard to nutrition, physical activity, and mental health for children”
• “[A]ssess the threat that … certain food ingredients, certain chemicals, and certain other exposures pose to children with respect to chronic inflammation or other established mechanisms of disease, using rigorous and transparent data, including international comparisons”
• “[I]dentify and evaluate federal programs and funding intended to prevent and treat childhood health issues”
• “[R]estore the integrity of science, including by eliminating undue industry influence, releasing findings and underlying data to the maximum extent permitted under applicable law, and increasing methodological rigor”
• “[E]stablish a framework for transparency and ethics review in industry-funded project”

Potential Impacts on the Food Industry

Besides the reporting and assessment requirements, the MAHA EO does not explicitly change FDA’s authorities or procedures with respect to the regulation of food, beverage, and dietary supplement products. However, taken in conjunction with Sec. Kennedy’s well-documented opinions regarding certain food industry practices and portions of the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), the EO does send a strong message regarding the priorities of this new administration and new scrutiny that may be exercised by FDA and other federal public health agencies.

Sec. Kennedy has consistently stated his belief that ultra-processed foods are detrimental to the health of Americans and should be further regulated. The frequent mention of childhood health in the EO should not come as a surprise, as Sec. Kennedy has stated his desire to ban beneficiaries of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) from using their assistance to purchase soda or processed food, as well as his desire to “get processed foods out of school lunch immediately.”³

The regulation of food additives is another issue that will likely gather much more attention in this second Trump administration. The EO’s reference to “certain food ingredients [and] certain chemicals” as having a negative impact on children’s health is similar rhetoric to that which Sec. Kennedy has used to describe food additives, wherein he has stated that “there are thousands of ingredients in our food that are illegal in other countries” and that “we are systematically poisoning our children.”⁴ Seed oils may be another target, given Sec. Kennedy’s previous pronouncements that “seed oils are one of the driving causes of the obesity epidemic.”⁵

In particular, two concrete actions that Sec. Kennedy could take that would have a widespread impact on the food industry are changes to the generally recognized as safe (GRAS) system as well as the upcoming 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines. The GRAS framework allows food manufacturers to conduct self-determinations that certain ingredients are safe for human consumption in categories of foods or in general. This is just one route to market under the FFDCA, and FDA has published detailed guidelines on how to properly conduct such assessments. However, Sec. Kennedy has long criticized the system and may seek to limit its use or potentially get rid of the system altogether. The Scientific Report for the 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines has already been published, however that report is advisory in nature and the finalized guidelines can be heavily influenced by the Secretary of HHS, providing Sec. Kennedy a platform to voice his opinions regarding nutrition.

Personnel changes at FDA will likely also have a significant impact as to how FDA approaches enforcement and regulation of food products. FDA Deputy Commissioner for Food, Jim Jones, recently resigned, stating that “indiscriminate” layoffs would make it “fruitless for him to continue.”⁶ An estimated 89 out of the 2,000 employees in his division were fired; many of those employees were studying chemical safety in the nation’s food supply. Attorney Kyle Diamantas, who is currently listed as a special assistant in the FDA commissioner’s office, is expected to be announced as the new deputy commissioner for human foods at FDA.⁷ Prior to his role at the FDA commissioner’s office, Diamantas was a partner in a law firm.

Conclusion

While the second Trump administration is still within its first months, both President Trump and Sec. Kennedy have indicated a willingness to implement fundamental changes that would have significant effects to those in the food industry. Whether these changes come to fruition is yet to be seen; it will be important to monitor future developments related to the MAHA Commission as well as other changes that occur at FDA and other agencies.

An earlier Advisory discusses the implications of the MAHA agenda on the life sciences industry in more detail. Arnold & Porter will continue to monitor these developments. If you have any questions about the content discussed in the Advisory or would like more information, please contact one of the authors of the Advisory or your existing Arnold & Porter contact.

© Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 2025 All Rights Reserved. This Advisory is intended to be a general summary of the law and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.