Editorial: West Virginia’s Food Dye Ban Shows Why Government Shouldn’t Be in the Business of Parenting
A federal judge has done what the West Virginia Legislature should have done from the start: pump the brakes on an unworkable, constitutionally vague food‑dye ban that hands sweeping power to state bureaucrats with no standards, no guardrails, and no accountability.
House Bill 2354 — the so‑called “food dye ban” — was sold as a public‑health initiative. In reality, it is a textbook example of government overreach: a law that restricts personal choice, burdens families, and delegates enormous authority to the West Virginia Department of Health without defining how that authority should be used.
Judge Irene Berger’s preliminary injunction makes the problem plain. The law “fails to give adequate notice of what conduct is prohibited and lacks sufficient standards to prevent arbitrary enforcement,” she wrote, noting that the Department of Health has no clear criteria for deciding which additives are “poisonous and injurious” beyond the eight dyes and preservatives already listed. In other words: the state can ban whatever it wants, whenever it wants, based on whatever justification it wants — or none at all.
“Despite the altruistic nature of the bill, that is not how a free society operates.” – Libertarian Party of WV Chair Taylor Richmond
A Pragmatic, Yet Temporary Agreement on School Lunches
“The Libertarian Party of WV understands the negative health impacts these dyes and other additives have on our health. That is why, at least in the short term, we see the benefit in removing them from the meals that are forced upon so many of West Virginia schoolchildren. This should only last until all students within our state receive the benefits of school choice. While so many are only given the option of attending a public school, the state has the duty to not poison those forced into their care.” – Richmond added.
Parents and Individuals, Not Politicians, Should Decide What They and Their Kids Eat
The Libertarian Party of West Virginia believes in empowering families, not bureaucracies. If individuals want to avoid certain food dyes for them and their families, they have every right to do so — and the market already provides countless dye‑free alternatives. But when the state imposes a one‑size‑fits‑all mandate, it strips people of choice and treats every West Virginian as incapable of making their own decisions.
Judge Berger’s ruling underscores the danger of vague laws that grant open‑ended authority to government agencies. If the Department of Health can ban additives based on undefined criteria, what stops future legislatures from expanding that power to other foods, products, or behaviors?
A Better Path Forward
West Virginia doesn’t need more bans. It needs more freedom.
Instead of dictating what families can eat, lawmakers should focus on policies that expand access to opportunity, reduce regulatory burdens, and allow communities to thrive. Healthier outcomes come from empowering individuals — not from top‑down mandates that treat adults like children and children like political props.
The injunction is temporary, but the message is clear: HB 2354 is a flawed law built on shaky constitutional ground. The Libertarian Party of West Virginia urges lawmakers to abandon paternalistic policies and trust West Virginians to make their own choices.
“Freedom works. It’s time our laws reflected that. West Virginia has an opportunity to lead with liberty and accomplish the goals of eliminating toxic additives from our foods via the free market and individual choice.” Richmond concluded.