The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a petition challenging a rule promulgated by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) banning small, high-powered, separable magnets. Upholding CPSC’s rule, the Tenth Circuit found that CPSC provided sufficient evidence about the hazards associated with the magnets to support its ban.
As we previously reported, CPSC faced a challenge to its rule banning products containing small, high-powered, separable magnets. CPSC asserted that the magnets can cause serious medical issues when more than one magnet is swallowed because the magnets attract each other through internal body tissue.
In late 2024, the Tenth Circuit heard oral arguments from both CPSC and MagnetSafety.org, which challenged the ban. MagnetSafety.org, represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), argued that the underlying data did not support CPSC’s rule. Specifically, MagnetSafety.org argued that the risk posed by the banned magnets “exists as a result not of their size, but of their attractive forces and materializes only when those attractive forces actually attract another magnet. . . .”
During oral arguments, counsel for Magnetsafety.org highlighted this point, arguing that CPSC relied on inadequate data in promulgating the rule because CPSC did not distinguish between multiple-magnet and single-magnet ingestions. The Tenth Circuit panel appeared skeptical of the argument, pointing out during oral arguments that the data available to CPSC from emergency room visits is “not that granular.”
The Tenth Circuit ultimately rejected Magnetsafety.org’s argument in its opinion published on March 3, 2025, finding that CPSC’s data adequately supports the rule. The court emphasized that CPSC, like many agencies, lacked “perfect empirical or statistical data.” Due to the nature of the incidents underlying CPSC’s rule, the relevant records from physicians’ offices tended to include “brief narratives of injuries rather than accounts featuring the granularity that petitioners demand. . . . As the Commission explained, this is because emergency-room physicians ‘are focused on information needed to treat the victim (e.g., that a magnet was ingested), rather than the specific product involved.’”
According to the opinion, CPSC also adequately demonstrated that the benefits of its rule banning the magnets outweigh the costs associated with the ban. The court relied on CPSC’s calculation that the combined medical and societal costs resulting from magnet-related incidents exceeds $210 million annually, while the rule itself would cost between $2 and $35 million.
Magnetsafety.org has not yet determined whether it will appeal the Tenth Circuit’s ruling. In the meantime, CPSC’s rule banning small, high-powered, separable magnets remains in place and companies should ensure their products comply with the rule.
[View source.]
