California is taking a bold step by planning to remove ultraprocessed foods from school menus, becoming a pioneer in the nation. But here's where it gets controversial: What really defines ultraprocessed foods, and should they be banned from our children's meals?
Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed a groundbreaking law that will make California the first state to gradually eliminate certain ultraprocessed foods from public school breakfasts and lunches. This law sets a ten-year timeline for schools to phase out these products entirely.
The legislation targets foods identified as “ultraprocessed foods of concern,” which are defined based on scientific research highlighting their significant health risks. The state’s Public Health Department is tasked with pinpointing exactly which items qualify under this category by June 2028, providing a clear guideline for schools.
Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, a Democrat and the bill’s author, explained in an interview how there’s a growing recognition among parents—especially millennials like himself—that what children eat affects not only their physical health but also their mental and emotional well-being. He noted an encouraging bipartisan consensus among lawmakers: regardless of politics, parents want healthier food options for their kids.
The bill passed with strong support from both Democrats and Republicans in September. Governor Newsom emphasized at the signing ceremony at Belvedere Middle School in Los Angeles that this should be a unifying cause beyond political boundaries.
Current dietary patterns show that American children consume roughly 62% of their daily calories from ultraprocessed foods—products typically made with few whole ingredients and often loaded with additives. Such diets have been linked to serious health problems including cancer, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes. Despite these dangers, there is no universal definition of ultraprocessed foods. California’s law fills that gap by defining these as foods and drinks containing at least one additive like stabilizers or artificial sweeteners, combined with high levels of unhealthy saturated fat, sodium, or added sugar.
The law introduces a stricter category: "ultraprocessed foods of concern," which are the specific focus of the statewide ban. To decide which products fall into this group, the state will assess factors such as addictiveness, scientific evidence of harm, and whether other places already restrict or label these foods.
Schools must begin phasing out these problematic foods by 2029 and complete the process by 2035. Interestingly, Gabriel points out that school districts that have already moved in this direction didn’t face higher costs; in fact, many saved money by serving healthier, real foods.
This isn’t California’s first attempt to improve children’s nutrition. Gabriel has also pushed for bans on certain artificial dyes and additives in school meals throughout the state. Earlier this year, Newsom issued an executive order to further clamp down on ultraprocessed foods and artificial dyes, signaling a strong commitment.
Nationwide, there’s increasing momentum to upgrade school meals. Since early 2025, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has advocated for policies limiting ultraprocessed foods and artificial dyes in schools. For example, West Virginia recently banned several artificial food dyes, and Texas passed legislation restricting additives in free or reduced-price school meals, both moves linked to Kennedy’s influence.
However, Gabriel stresses that California’s efforts started long before these recent national campaigns. He proudly highlights California’s leadership role in safeguarding children’s health through food policy.
Governor Newsom remarked on the initial backlash to the idea—recalling how discussions about banning candies like Skittles sparked backlash and confusion. Now, however, even traditionally conservative states are racing to adopt similar policies, which he finds both surprising and encouraging.
But this raises important questions: Are we ready to reconsider what we label as “food” in schools? And is a ten-year phase-out too slow given the urgent health concerns? Some may argue these measures don't go far enough or that focusing on ultraprocessed foods unfairly targets convenience and affordability.
What do you think—should schools lead the way in cutting out ultraprocessed foods, or is this an overreach? Share your thoughts and join the conversation below.
