Campbell’s printed a promise of purity on the front of every Cape Cod chip bag, and the FDA already confirmed that promise was a lie before Campbell’s even bought the brand.
The Label Said One Thing. The Ingredients Said Another.
Campbell’s sells Cape Cod potato chips as a premium, “better-for-you” snack. The bags feature bold front-of-pack claims: “No Artificial Colors, Flavors or Preservatives” or “No Artificial Flavors or Preservatives.” Those words appear on all 11 product varieties named in the lawsuit, from Sea Salt & Vinegar to Honey BBQ Waves to White Cheddar & Sour Cream Waves.
The ingredients list tells a different story. Every single one of those products contains citric acid. The FDA, the USDA, and independent food scientists all classify citric acid as a preservative. Campbell’s knew this. The company’s own supply chain, quality, and finance controls were integrated into the Cape Cod operation after its $6.1 billion (enough to give every public school teacher in America a $90,000 bonus) acquisition of Snyder’s-Lance in 2018.
A class action complaint filed July 7, 2025, by plaintiff Jaqueline Dushaj of Middletown, New York, alleges Campbell’s engaged in a systematic, ongoing pattern of false advertising. Dushaj purchased the Sea Salt & Vinegar and Sweet Mesquite Barbeque flavors as recently as May 2025 from a Walmart store, relying on the front-of-pack claim to make her purchase decision.
Eleven Bags. One Lie. Repeated Every Single Time.
The complaint documents the fraudulent label claim across every variety: Sea Salt & Vinegar; Sweet & Spicy Jalapeno; Sweet Mesquite Barbeque; Sea Salt & Cracked Pepper; Sour Cream & Onion; Less Fat Aged White Cheddar & Sour Cream; Less Fat Sea Salt & Vinegar; Less Fat Sweet Mesquite Barbeque; Honey BBQ Waves; Jalapeno Ranch Waves; and White Cheddar & Sour Cream Waves. That covers all sizes of each flavor.
Campbell’s did not make a typo. Campbell’s did not make an isolated production error. Campbell’s applied the same false claim to an entire product line, across every size format, on every shelf in every store that stocks Cape Cod chips nationwide.
— Class Action Complaint, July 2025
All 11 Cape Cod Varieties Carrying the False Claim
Each variety contains citric acid while labeling claims “No Artificial Preservatives” — source: complaint paragraphs 13–23
The FDA Already Told Them. They Did It Anyway.
What Citric Acid Actually Does to Your Food
The FDA defines a chemical preservative as “any chemical that, when added to food, tends to prevent or retard deterioration thereof.” Citric acid fits that definition precisely. Food scientists classify it as an antioxidant that delays oxidative deterioration and as a compound with direct antimicrobial properties. The complaint cites the FDA’s own published reference tables, which list citric acid under the category “Preservatives” with the function of preventing spoilage from bacteria, molds, fungi, and yeast, slowing rancidity, and maintaining freshness.
The complaint also cites a 2010 FDA warning letter sent to Chiquita Brands International and Fresh Express. In that letter, the FDA declared their pineapple products “misbranded” specifically because they contained citric acid without declaring it as a preservative on the label. The FDA’s exact language was that the products contained “the chemical preservatives ascorbic acid and citric acid” and that the labels failed to declare these preservatives. That letter is publicly available and was issued 15 years ago. Every food company operating in this country has had 15 years to read it.
The USDA further reinforces that citric acid’s role in food products is functionally inseparable from preservation. Its documented properties include chelating metals, buffering acidity, and directly increasing the effectiveness of antimicrobial preservatives already present in a formula. Calling citric acid merely a “flavor” ingredient while ignoring its preservative function is a selective reading of the science that benefits only the company selling the product.
Campbell’s Intent Doesn’t Matter. The Chemistry Does.
Campbell’s will likely argue that they added citric acid for flavor, not preservation. The complaint directly addresses this defense and shuts it down. Under the FDA’s own regulatory definition, a preservative is any chemical that tends to prevent deterioration. The Merriam-Webster definition cited in the complaint defines “preservative” as “something that preserves or has the power of preserving.” Neither definition requires that the company intended the chemical to preserve. The power and tendency are enough.
Academic food science literature is equally unambiguous. A chapter on direct food additives in fruit processing cited in the complaint states that acids used as food additives “serve a dual purpose, as acidulants and as preservatives.” Campbell’s cannot legally separate those two functions on a label and claim only one applies.
— United States Department of Agriculture, Citric Acid Technical Report
The Non-Financial Ledger: What No Settlement Can Pay Back
Jaqueline Dushaj is a real person in Middletown, New York. She bought Cape Cod chips from her local Walmart and ShopRite. She did what every responsible shopper does: she read the label. The label told her there were no artificial preservatives. She believed it. She bought the product on multiple occasions over three years. In May 2025, she was still buying it, still trusting that claim. She had no way of knowing that the company printing that promise had access to FDA guidance, USDA research, and decades of food science literature, all confirming that the claim was false.
That is the specific betrayal this case is about: the gap between what a person believes they are choosing and what a corporation actually put in the bag. For the 71% of American consumers who say preservative-free claims are among the most important factors in their purchase decisions, that gap is enormous. These are people managing chronic inflammation, allergies, dietary restrictions, and general health anxiety in a food environment that already makes honesty difficult to find. They reached for a bag of chips that promised them something real. Campbell’s handed them a performance.
The complaint documents that manufactured citric acid (MCA) — the kind used in food products, not the kind found in a lemon — is produced using Aspergillus niger, a processed derivative of black mold. The average consumer reading “citric acid” on a label reasonably assumes they are getting a natural fruit-derived compound. They are not. The complaint cites published research finding that MCA consumption has been linked to inflammatory reactions including joint pain, muscle pain, stomach pain, swelling, and shortness of breath. People who chose Cape Cod chips specifically to avoid synthetic additives were consuming a chemically synthesized, mold-derived preservative the whole time, without their knowledge or consent.
The economic injury is real but it runs alongside something harder to quantify: the erosion of trust. Every time a company like Campbell’s exploits “free-from” labeling to charge a premium for a product that does not actually deliver what it promises, it degrades the signal value of every honest label in the store. The shopper who reads ingredients carefully, who pays the extra dollar for the “cleaner” product, who passes on the cheaper bag because the label looks less trustworthy — that person is being systematically deceived and financially penalized for trying to make informed decisions. Campbell’s profited from the trust that careful shoppers extend to premium-priced, health-forward branding. That trust was stolen.
They Paid $6.1 Billion for This Brand. Then Kept the Lie on the Bag.
On March 26, 2018, Campbell’s announced the acquisition of Snyder’s-Lance — the former owner of Cape Cod — for $6.1 billion (enough to pay the annual rent for roughly 180,000 average American households for a full year). Then-CEO Denise Morrison described the acquisition as creating “a unique, diversified snacking portfolio of differentiated brands and a large variety of better-for-you snacks for consumers.”
The phrase “better-for-you” is doing enormous work in that quote. It is the precise marketing positioning that makes the false “No Artificial Preservatives” claim so profitable. Campbell’s knew exactly what it was buying: a brand that sells at a premium because consumers believe it is healthier than mass-market alternatives. After integration, Campbell’s built a unified snacking division called Campbell Snacks and explicitly stated it had integrated “key control functions, including supply chain and quality.” Campbell’s quality control team therefore owned the label. Campbell’s quality control team signed off on the claim. Campbell’s quality control team allowed it to persist.
The “Better-For-You” Money Machine
Campbell’s acquisition cost vs. the global healthy food market it was buying into (in USD trillions). Source: complaint paragraphs 11 and 37.
The global healthy food market stood at $4.4 trillion (roughly 55,000 times the annual revenue of a mid-size American city) at the time of that acquisition and was forecast to hit $7 trillion (more than the combined GDP of Japan and Germany) by 2025. Campbell’s was not unaware of those numbers. The company bought Cape Cod specifically to plant its flag in that market. Misleading “free-from” labeling was the toll booth on the road to those profits.
Legal Receipts: The Quotes That Matter
These are direct citations from the source complaint and the government documents it references. Read them slowly.
Societal Impact Mapping
Public Health
The Mold-Derived Chemical Nobody Told You About
The citric acid in your Cape Cod chips is almost certainly not the citric acid your body would encounter in a lemon. Approximately 99% of the world’s manufactured citric acid (MCA) supply comes from a fermentation process using Aspergillus niger, a black mold derivative. The complaint cites published peer-reviewed research documenting this production process and noting that MCA is fundamentally different from naturally occurring citric acid found in fruit.
The health implications matter to a significant portion of the population. The complaint cites a case report series published in the journal Toxicology Reports finding that manufactured citric acid consumption was linked to significant inflammatory reactions. Documented side effects include joint pain, muscle pain, stomach pain, swelling and stiffness, and shortness of breath. These are not hypothetical edge cases; they are documented reactions observed in human subjects who consumed MCA-containing products.
People who specifically seek out preservative-free foods often do so because they are managing inflammation-related conditions, food sensitivities, or autoimmune issues. They are, by definition, the most vulnerable consumers in the market. Campbell’s targeted this exact population with “free-from” language, charged them a premium, and delivered the very ingredient they were trying to avoid. The public health dimension of that deception is direct and specific.
Economic Inequality
Health Literacy Gets Weaponized Against the People Who Have It
The complaint establishes that consumers pay a premium for “free-from” products. The global healthy food market stood at $4.4 trillion (roughly the entire GDP of Japan) and was climbing. Campbell’s positioned Cape Cod as part of a “better-for-you” portfolio precisely because health-conscious consumers pay more. That premium represents a direct wealth transfer from careful, health-literate shoppers to a corporation that produced a product failing to deliver what those shoppers paid for.
The economic harm documented in the complaint is specific: plaintiff Dushaj and class members either paid the full purchase price for a product they would not have bought at all, or they overpaid relative to what an honestly labeled product would have commanded. Multiplied across years of purchases, across a national distribution network, across an entire category of consumers who read labels specifically to protect their health, this is a large-scale, systematic extraction of money from people trying to make responsible food choices.
The class action mechanism exists precisely because individual losses of a few dollars per bag are too small to litigate alone but enormous in aggregate. The complaint estimates the aggregate class claims exceed $5,000,000 (enough to cover a year of groceries for roughly 2,200 average American households). That number likely represents a floor, not a ceiling, given the breadth of national distribution and the three-year class period.
What “Free-From” Consumers Actually Care About
Percentage of free-from shoppers rating each claim as “most important.” Source: Mintel, cited in complaint paragraph 34.
The Cost of a Lie
What Now? Here’s What You Can Actually Do.
The Corporate Roles That Own This Decision
The complaint names The Campbell’s Company, headquartered at 1 Campbell Place, Camden, NJ 08103. Specific executive names are not identified in the source complaint. The decision to apply and maintain this labeling falls within the following corporate functions:
- Chief Executive Officer, The Campbell’s Company
- President, Campbell Snacks Division
- Chief Quality Officer / VP of Quality Control
- Chief Marketing Officer / VP of Brand Marketing, Cape Cod
- General Counsel / Chief Legal Officer
Explore by category
Product Safety Violations
When companies sell dangerous goods, consumers pay the price.
View Cases →Financial Fraud & Corruption
Lies, scams, and executive impunity that distort markets.
View Cases →
