Amazon is suing the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) over its decision to hold the tech giant responsible for faulty products sold on its platform. The dispute, which centers on Amazon’s classification as a distributor, has led the company to argue that the CPSC is “unconstitutionally constructed.” The lawsuit, filed in 2024, seeks to have Amazon recognized as a “third-party logistics provider” rather than being held accountable for issuing recalls and refunds for problematic products.
A Dispute That Goes Back to 2021
The legal battle’s origins date back to 2021, when the CPSC sued Amazon, demanding the recall of hazardous items like carbon monoxide detectors, dangerous hair dryers, and flammable children’s sleepwear. While Amazon took steps to inform customers about these safety concerns and offered store credits, the CPSC insisted that the company take further action. Fast forward to 2024, and the CPSC moved to classify Amazon as a distributor, effectively making the company liable for issuing recalls and refunds through its Fulfilled by Amazon (FBA) program.
Amazon’s Push for Reclassification
Under the FBA program, sellers ship products to Amazon warehouses, where the company handles inventory, packing, shipping, and customer service. Amazon, however, argues that it does not manufacture or own the faulty products and thus should not be treated as a distributor. Instead, the company wants to be considered a logistics provider, much like FedEx or UPS, which only handle transportation and delivery.
CPSC’s Structure Under Scrutiny
In addition to challenging the classification, Amazon has raised concerns about the CPSC’s structure, arguing that its commissioners—appointed by the President and serving long terms—are “judge, jury, and prosecutor” in the case. Amazon contends that the relative invulnerability of the CPSC makes it unconstitutional, with too much power concentrated in one entity.
This move comes at a time when large corporations are increasingly questioning the authority of regulatory bodies. The outcome of this case could have broader implications for how tech companies interact with government agencies in the future.
For more information, check out the full article on Engadget.