From Lunch Lines to Lifespans: California’s Push to Ban Ultra-Processed Foods in Schools
Anya Dalal
California is considering a bold new policy to reshape children’s health through school meal reform. In June 2025, lawmakers passed AB 1264 in the State Assembly. If approved by the Senate, it would require the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to identify “particularly harmful” ultra-processed foods by 2026, begin phasing them out of school breakfasts and lunches by 2028, and fully eliminate them by 2032. The bill must now pass the full Senate and be signed into law before it takes effect.
Loaded with added sugars, saturated fats, and artificial additives, ultra-processed foods are linked to higher rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and even mental health issues. By targeting schools, the state aims to shape habits during the formative years, when diets have the greatest impact on health trajectories.
This proposal, however, is ambitious and raises concerns throughout the state. Districts already struggling with limited funds worry about higher food costs. Some parents argue that students should have the freedom to choose, while others point to logistical challenges in sourcing healthier alternatives on a large scale. Yet, California has long been a leader in school nutrition reform, from banning soda vending machines to pioneering farm-to-table programs.
California educates almost 6 million K-12 students, and the daily school meal is often their most reliable source of nutrition. For many low-income children, it may be their only balanced meal of the day. In this light, restricting ultra-processed foods also aims to address making things more equitable by ensuring all children, regardless of family income, have access to healthy meals.
The phased timeline allows industry, schools, and local governments to adapt, but the policy also poses a challenge to food manufacturers. Companies that rely heavily on low-cost, shelf-stable products may face pressure to reformulate or innovate. If successful, California could become a model for other states, much as it has with vehicle emissions and plastic bans.
From our perspective, the deeper question is both cultural and pragmatic. Will students accept these changes, or will they resist, sneaking fast food into cafeterias and rejecting what they perceive as “healthy school food”? Ultimately, the law represents the broader vision that schools not only exist for academic learning, but also serve as environments that teach children lifelong habits. This path may be bumpy; however, with an earlier intervention, there will hopefully be a longer payoff.
Image credit: Food & Wine / Getty Images