House Committee on Small Business Opens Investigation into CPSC Commissioner Trumka

On July 25, 2024, Representative Roger Williams, Chairman of the House Committee on Small Business (the “Committee”), informed Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Chairman Alexander Hoehn-Saric that the Committee has opened an investigation into CPSC Commissioner Richard Trumka for potential violations of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA).

As we summarized in an earlier post, on April 15, 2024, Trumka issued a unilateral public statement, encouraging retailers to stop selling weighted infant swaddles and blankets, labeling the products “unsafe.” Trumka also sent letters to multiple retailers of wearable blankets and swaddles, encouraging the retailers to stop selling weighted infant swaddles and blankets products. Many retailers did in fact stop selling certain manufacturers’ products in response to Trumka’s missives. One manufacturer, Dreamland Baby Co., confirmed that major retailers stopped selling its products within a few days of Trumka’s statements, affecting Dreamland’s ability to continue operating.

Trumka then released another statement on April 26 supporting retailers’ decision to stop selling weighted blankets. In support of his position that these weighted infant sleep products are “dangerous,” Trumka cited a Washington Post article naming Dreamland and another manufacturer as manufacturers of the “dangerous” weighted infant swaddles and blankets. It was this publication of the article singling out Dreamland and another manufacturer that Williams asserted may violate the CPSA. Under Section 6(b) of the CPSA, CPSC is prohibited from disclosing information about a consumer product that identifies a manufacturer or private labeler unless CPSC has taken various steps to ensure identifying the manufacturer is accurate and fair under the circumstances, which includes providing advance notice to the company.

Trumka’s unilateral actions against weighted infant swaddles and blankets came after CPSC voted 3–1 against his proposal to impose a mandatory safety standard for weighted sleep products in November 2023. Hoehn-Saric, who voted against the amendment, explained his belief that CPSC staff had not yet conducted the necessary research to be in a position to draft a proposed rule in 2024.

In his letter to CPSC, Williams decried Trumka’s actions, which “caused immense harm to small businesses.” He further accused Trumka of “misusing his position as a Commissioner,” noting this was “not the only time [Trumka] has taken unilateral actions to advance his own agenda.” Williams explained that, in October 2022, Trumka advocated for stricter regulation of gas stoves but did not receive sufficient support from the other commissioners to pursue a rulemaking. Trumka took his position public in an interview with Bloomberg in January 2023, describing gas stoves as “a hidden hazard” and asserting that “any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.” These statements were met with strong criticism from industry groups and elected officials alike.

In his letter to Hoehn-Saric, Williams expressed concern with this pattern of behavior from Trumka in his short tenure as a commissioner, writing: “The Committee is concerned that a single CPSC Commissioner is exerting undue pressure on entities and forcing them to improperly remove small business’ products from their shelves to the detriment of those small businesses. Small businesses deserve a chance to fairly compete in the marketplace without undue influence from the federal government—whether that be through rulemaking or letters from a rogue CPSC Commissioner.” To aid in the Committee’s investigation, Williams asked CPSC to provide a copy of all letters Trumka sent on CPSC letterhead and all rules and amendments that Trumka proposed.

CPSC has long voiced its opposition to Section 6(b)’s protections, on occasion pushing the boundaries and publicly identifying manufacturers in the name of consumer safety. But Trumka’s blatant, repeated disregard of Section 6(b), and the resulting impact on small businesses, evidence why these restrictions must be followed. We will continue to monitor developments on the Committee’s investigation and provide updates.