Greenwashing Lawsuit News: Apple, Tyson, and SEC Cases

Greenwashing lawsuits have moved from a niche consumer-protection concern into one of the most active areas of corporate litigation, with more than 150 U.S. class actions tracked since 2015 and a rising tally of regulatory penalties against companies that overstated their environmental credentials. Courts have both greenlit and dismissed high-profile cases against Apple, Coca-Cola, Delta, Tyson Foods, and Amazon; the SEC has fined asset managers tens of millions of dollars over misleading ESG marketing; and state attorneys general have stepped forward as the leading government enforcers against misleading climate claims.

How Many Greenwashing Cases Are Being Filed

The nonprofit Truth in Advertising has counted over 150 U.S. class-action lawsuits alleging greenwashing since it began monitoring in 2015. Filings jumped from seven to 17 in 2020 and have stayed above a dozen per year since, with 11 new cases added in 2023 alone.¹

Nearly half the complaints have been filed in California. Home and garden products account for 31 percent of cases, with food and beverage and personal care each at 20 percent. The marketing terms most often challenged are “sustainable” (23 percent of cases), “environmentally friendly” or “eco-friendly” (21 percent), and “recyclable” (14 percent). About 74 percent of tracked cases have settled or been dismissed, and of the 15 settlements with disclosed terms, 14 provided money to class members and 11 forced the defendant to change its marketing.¹

Apple Wins Dismissal of “Carbon Neutral” Watch Case

In February 2025, consumers filed Dib v. Apple Inc. in the Northern District of California, alleging Apple falsely marketed its Apple Watch Series 9, SE, and Ultra 2 as “carbon neutral.” The plaintiffs said they paid a premium based on the claim and argued Apple’s offset strategy lacked “additionality.” The complaint pointed to a Kenya-based deforestation-prevention project on land that had been legally protected since 1983 and a China-based tree-planting project on land satellite imagery showed was already 78 percent forested.²

On February 20, 2026, U.S. District Judge Noël Wise granted Apple’s motion to dismiss, calling the plaintiffs’ attacks on the offset methodology “conclusory allegations.”³ The plaintiffs chose not to amend, ending the case.⁴

Tyson Foods Agrees to Drop “Climate-Smart Beef”

The Environmental Working Group sued Tyson Foods in September 2024 in D.C. Superior Court over its “climate-smart beef” marketing and its pledge to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. The court rejected Tyson’s motion to dismiss, ruling that a net-zero claim can be misleading if a company has no realistic plan to achieve it with current technology.⁵

The case settled on November 17, 2025. Tyson must stop using “net-zero” and “climate-smart beef” labels, pull such claims from platforms it controls within 40 days, and refrain from making new environmental claims on these topics for five years unless they are substantiated by an independent third-party expert using credible science. The financial terms were placed in a confidential addendum.⁶⁷

Coca-Cola Must Face Sustainability Suit After Appeal

The Earth Island Institute sued Coca-Cola in June 2021 in D.C. Superior Court, alleging the company marketed itself as sustainable while producing roughly 2.9 million metric tons of plastic waste annually and missing its own recycling targets. The trial court dismissed the suit as “puffery.”⁸

On August 29, 2024, the D.C. Court of Appeals reversed, finding the allegations “facially plausible” and rejecting the puffery defense as a matter of law. The appeals court held that whether sustainability claims mislead a reasonable consumer is a question for a factfinder, not a judge on a motion to dismiss. It also ruled that Coca-Cola’s statements qualified as representations about “goods and services” under D.C.’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act and that multiple statements could be aggregated to show a misleading overall impression. Both the D.C. attorney general and solicitor general had filed briefs supporting the plaintiffs.⁹⁸ The case went back to the lower court for further proceedings.

Delta’s Carbon-Neutral Flying Case Moves Toward Class Certification

Mayanna Berrin filed a class action against Delta Air Lines in May 2023 in the Central District of California, alleging Delta’s “carbon-neutral” marketing induced customers to overpay. She argues Delta’s carbon offsets were often ineffective and that the airline knew or should have known its certifications were inaccurate.¹⁰

In March 2024, the court ruled that the Airline Deregulation Act does not preempt state consumer-protection claims about Delta’s carbon-neutrality marketing. In November 2024, the court found Berrin had standing to seek an injunction as a “longstanding and loyal Delta customer” who intends to fly again. As of mid-2026 the case is in the class certification phase; Delta filed its opposition in October 2025.¹⁰

Amazon Sued Over “Sustainable” Paper Products

In March 2025, consumers from multiple states filed Ramos et al v. Amazon.com, Inc. in the Western District of Washington, alleging Amazon misleads buyers about the sustainability of its Amazon Basics toilet paper and paper towels. The complaint challenges Amazon’s “Sustainability Leaf” badge, its “Climate Pledge Friendly” logo, and an unqualified Forest Stewardship Council logo, arguing the products are sourced from suppliers that clearcut old-growth forests in Canada’s boreal region. The suit asserts violations under the laws of 28 states and the District of Columbia and cites both the FTC’s Green Guides and Amazon’s own internal advertising guidelines.¹¹ The case remains active.

Settlements That Show What Companies Are Paying

Several settlements illustrate the financial exposure companies now face over environmental marketing:

Keurig Green Mountain agreed to a $10 million settlement in 2023 in the Northern District of California over “recyclable” labels on K-Cup pods that were not practically recyclable at most facilities.¹²
Rust-Oleum settled a California federal class action for $1.5 million in October 2025 over “Non-Toxic” and “Earth Friendly” labels on its Krud Kutter cleaning line. The court rejected the company’s argument that “Earth Friendly” was puffery. Rust-Oleum agreed to drop the “Non-Toxic” claim and add qualifying language, and over 23,000 claims were accepted.¹³
JBS USA settled with the New York Attorney General in November 2025 over its “Net Zero by 2040” marketing. The AG found JBS made the pledge without ever calculating its total greenhouse gas emissions or building a plan to meet the goal. JBS agreed to pay $1.1 million toward climate-smart agriculture programs, stop calling net-zero a “pledge” or “commitment,” and submit to three years of compliance monitoring.¹⁴¹⁵

SEC Penalties Against ESG Funds

Federal securities regulators have hit several asset managers for misrepresenting how they use environmental, social, and governance factors.

DWS Investment Management Americas, the asset management arm of Deutsche Bank, paid a $19 million SEC penalty in September 2023 for materially misleading statements about its ESG integration. The SEC found that while DWS marketed “ESG in its DNA,” it had not adequately implemented the policies it described to clients.¹⁶ In April 2025, the Frankfurt state prosecutor’s office separately fined DWS €25 million (about $27 million), concluding that the firm’s ESG claims “did not correspond to reality.” DWS acknowledged that “in the past our marketing was sometimes exuberant.”¹⁷

In November 2024, the SEC charged Invesco Advisers with claiming between 70 and 94 percent of its assets under management were “ESG integrated” when the figure included passive ETFs that did not consider ESG factors at all. Invesco had no written policy defining what “ESG integration” meant and paid a $17.5 million civil penalty without admitting or denying the findings.¹⁸

The SEC fined WisdomTree $4 million in October 2024 for advertising that its ESG funds would not invest in fossil fuels or tobacco while holding exactly those investments. The agency found WisdomTree had known about screening deficiencies since at least September 2020 but did not buy supplemental data to fix them. The SEC disbanded its dedicated Climate and ESG enforcement task force in September 2024 but said it would continue pursuing greenwashing cases using the expertise built up in the unit.¹⁹

First Federal Carbon-Offset Fraud Charges

In October 2024, the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission brought what they described as the first federal fraud charges involving the voluntary carbon credit market. The target, CQC Impact Investors LLC, is a Washington, D.C.-based carbon credit developer. Prosecutors alleged that CQC personnel manipulated fuel-usage data, falsified energy-efficiency testing on cookstove projects in Africa, Asia, and Central America, and claimed a 100 percent operational rate for stoves that did not function as reported. CQC itself concluded that roughly six million credits were erroneously reported and that 30 percent of its previously certified credits should never have been issued.²⁰

CQC had raised $250 million in equity from a private investor based on those misrepresentations, and that investor later wrote down the investment by roughly $100 million. CQC admitted the facts and settled with both agencies, drawing a reduced $1 million CFTC penalty because of its cooperation. Former CEO Kenneth Newcombe faces a pending federal complaint seeking civil penalties, disgorgement, and a permanent trading ban.²¹

Keurig’s SEC Settlement Over Recyclability

In September 2024, the SEC fined Keurig Dr Pepper $1.5 million for misleading investors in its 2019 and 2020 annual reports about K-Cup pod recyclability. The company had told investors that testing “validate[d] that [K-Cup pods] can be effectively recycled,” but it did not disclose that two of the country’s largest recycling companies, operating more than a third of U.S. recycling facilities, had given significant negative feedback and said they would not accept the pods.²²²³

State Attorneys General Are Taking the Lead

With federal enforcement shifting under the current administration, state attorneys general have become the primary government actors policing corporate environmental marketing.

In September 2025, a coalition of 16 state attorneys general led by Montana AG Austin Knudsen sent a 15-page letter to Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft demanding answers about their renewable energy marketing. The attorneys general contend the companies’ claims of matching 100 percent of their energy use with renewables are misleading because they rely on “unbundled” renewable energy certificates, financial instruments representing the right to claim renewable energy that the companies neither generated nor directly consumed. The letter posed 21 questions to each company, with a response deadline of October 27, 2025. Amazon acknowledged receipt and defended its use of RECs as a necessary accounting mechanism. Microsoft declined to comment. Google and Meta did not respond publicly.²⁴²⁵

Other state-level actions include the Arizona Attorney General’s 2024 suit against Cummins Inc. and FCA US LLC for marketing diesel trucks as “super clean” while allegedly using defeat devices on emissions tests, and the Maine Attorney General’s November 2024 suit against oil companies and a trade association for allegedly misleading the public about fossil fuels’ climate impacts.²⁶

International Cases Reaching Companies That Sell in the U.S.

Greenwashing enforcement outside the U.S. is advancing on a parallel track and increasingly reaches multinational companies.

On March 1, 2024, a high court in Viborg, Denmark, found Danish Crown, Europe’s largest pork producer, guilty of greenwashing in the country’s first such verdict. The Vegetarian Society of Denmark and The Climate Movement had challenged the company’s 2020 “Climate-Controlled Pigs” marketing. The court ruled the “climate-controlled pig” label was deceptive under Denmark’s Marketing Act, though it allowed the phrase “more climate-friendly than you think” as a documented comparison.²⁷²⁸

In Australia, the securities regulator ASIC secured a $10.5 million penalty against superannuation fund Active Super in March 2025. The Federal Court found Active Super falsely claimed to have eliminated investments in gambling, coal mining, oil tar sands, and Russian entities while actually holding stakes in Whitehaven Coal, SkyCity Entertainment, and Gazprom. The violations lasted about two and a half years.²⁹

The European Union adopted Directive 2024/825 in February 2024, prohibiting vague marketing terms like “eco-friendly” or “green” unless companies can demonstrate recognized excellent environmental performance. “Carbon neutrality” claims based on offsets are banned unless they reflect a product’s actual lifecycle impact, and forward-looking pledges such as “net zero by 2030” must be backed by detailed implementation plans verified by independent experts.³⁰ Member states had to transpose the directive into national law by March 27, 2026, with provisions taking effect across the bloc on September 27, 2026.³¹

Which Claims Are Surviving Court

Litigation has moved from challenges to general eco-labels toward focused attacks on carbon offset integrity and the realism of net-zero pledges. Plaintiffs increasingly rely on the “price premium” theory, arguing that consumers paid more specifically because of climate marketing. That framing has proven more effective at establishing standing than broader environmental-harm arguments.³²

Courts continue to split specific, substantiated claims from vague ones treated as puffery. Shoe company Allbirds won dismissal by publishing the lifecycle analysis behind its “low carbon footprint” claims. Broad, undefined terms on product labels remain legally vulnerable, especially without any qualifying context.¹² Some companies have responded with “greenhushing,” quietly pulling environmental claims rather than defending them. Delta has reportedly shifted its public messaging from carbon offsets toward broader “decarbonization” language.³²

The FTC’s Green Guides, the closest thing to a federal standard for environmental marketing, remain stuck in their 2012 version. The agency sought public comment on potential revisions in December 2022 and held a workshop on recyclability claims in May 2023, but as of early 2025 said it had “nothing new to share” on the update. The guides are non-binding and do not preempt state law, so even compliance with them offers no guaranteed legal protection, and states like California keep advancing their own standards for recyclability and compostability claims.³³³⁴

1
Truth in Advertising. By the Numbers: Greenwashing Class Action Lawsuits
2
Courthouse News Service. Dib v. Apple Inc., Class Action Complaint
3
Climate Case Chart. Dib v. Apple Inc.
4
Renewable Matter. Apple Wins US Greenwashing Case Over Carbon Neutral Claims
5
University of Texas School of Law. Greenwashing Lawsuits in 2025
6
Earthjustice. Tyson Foods Agrees to Stop Making Net-Zero and Climate-Smart Beef Claims
7
Environmental Working Group. EWG v. Tyson Foods Inc., Settlement Agreement
8
D.C. Courts. Earth Island Institute v. Coca-Cola, Court of Appeals Decision
9
ESG Dive. D.C. Appeals Court Rules Coca-Cola Must Face Greenwashing Lawsuit
10
Climate Case Chart. Berrin v. Delta Air Lines Inc.
11
Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro. Amazon Faces Consumer Lawsuit Alleging Deforestation Behind Amazon Basics Paper Products
12
Mintz. Greenwashing Class Action Litigation: Emerging Risk
13
Peters and Peters. Californian District Court Approves US$1.5 Million Settlement to Class Action Greenwashing Suit
14
Earthjustice. Earthjustice Statement on New York Attorney General Settlement With JBS
15
New York Attorney General. People of the State of New York v. JBS USA Food Company, Assurance of Discontinuance
16
SEC. SEC Press Release 2023-194
17
Reuters. German Asset Manager DWS Fined 25 Mln EUR in Greenwashing Case
18
SEC. SEC Press Release 2024-179
19
ESG Dive. SEC Slaps $4M Fine on WisdomTree Over Greenwashing
20
SEC. In the Matter of CQC Impact Investors LLC, Administrative Proceeding
21
CFTC. CFTC Press Release 8994-24
22
NPR. Keurig K-Cup Pods Recycle SEC Fine
23
SEC. SEC Press Release 2024-122
24
ESG Dive. Republican State AGs Probe Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Google Use of Renewable Energy Certificates
25
Trellis. State AGs Challenge Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft Renewable Claims
26
Alston & Bird. State AG Actions
27
Vegetarisk.dk. Danish Crown Found Guilty of Greenwashing of Pork in Denmark
28
Bloomberg. Europe’s Biggest Pork Producer Loses in Greenwashing Court Case
29
ASIC. Active Super Ordered to Pay $10.5 Million Penalty in ASIC’s Third Greenwashing Court Action
30
EUR-Lex. Directive (EU) 2024/825
31
Hogan Lovells. EU Member States Move Forward With Transposition of Anti-Greenwashing Directive
32
Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. Climate and Carbon Litigation Trends
33
Packaging Dive. Packaging Labeling Recyclable Compostable Green Guides
34
FTC. Green Guides