Senate Moves to Eradicate Animal Testing for Beauty Products in Arizona

Arizona’s Senate has made strides toward banning cosmetics produced using animal testing. On Monday, lawmakers granted preliminary approval for legislation aimed at prohibiting the sale of such products.

Senate Bill 1031, sponsored by Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, seeks to impose significant penalties on manufacturers who violate this law. The first day of violation would result in a $1,000 fine, followed by $500 for each subsequent day. However, this bill does not guarantee the immediate removal of all tested cosmetics from store shelves.

There are several exemptions within the bill. For instance, cosmetics tested outside the U.S. per foreign regulatory agency requirements can still enter the market. Additional allowances are made for tests involving substances not specifically designated as cosmetics.

The measure permits testing mandated by federal or state agencies to evaluate serious health risks, provided no alternatives exist that do not involve animals.

While the precise extent of these exemptions remains uncertain, the absence of opposition from cosmetics industry lobbyists during prior committee discussions aligns with a broader trend against animal testing in cosmetic manufacturing, according to Kavanagh.

Supporters of the legislation, including 16-year-old activist Jordan Sucato, argue that these changes are crucial for reducing animal suffering. Named Time Magazine’s Kid of the Year in 2024 for her advocacy, Sucato emphasized that alternatives, such as synthetic tissues that replicate human skin reactions, have made animal testing obsolete.

She illustrated the pain inflicted on animals in testing procedures, saying, “This level of suffering is unjustifiable for the sake of beauty products.”

Karen Michael, a board member of the Animal Defense League of Arizona, noted that several other states and countries have already enacted similar laws. She insisted that the proposed legislation, effective only for cosmetics manufactured after 2025, still aligns with necessary federal and state guidelines.

However, some senators question the need for the law. Sen. Frank Carroll, R-Sun City West, argued that consumers should be able to choose products based on their testing methods. The accessibility of this information, though, remains a gray area.

While certain companies show transparency by labeling their products as cruelty-free, finding a comprehensive list of non-tested cosmetics can be challenging. Michael addressed these concerns, mentioning resources that help consumers identify humane products.

Critics of the initiative, including Carroll and Senate Majority Leader Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, ultimately voted against the legislation in the Natural Resources Committee. Their reasons for opposition were not disclosed.