Consumer · Regulation

One State Banned the Coating on Your Frying Pan. The Industry Sued to Stop It — and Lost.

On the first of January 2025, it became illegal to sell most non-stick cookware in Minnesota. A trade group representing the biggest names in pans went to federal court to overturn it. The judge said no, twice. Two brothers had spent years building cookware with no coating on it at all — and are now clearing the last of it.

Most people found out the way you're finding out now — long after it happened, and by accident.

In 2023 the Minnesota legislature passed a statute formally catalogued as Minn. Stat. § 116.943. Locally it is known as Amara's Law, after Amara Strande, a young woman from the east metro who died that year of a rare liver cancer. It bans the sale of eleven categories of consumer products containing intentionally added PFAS — the compounds commonly called forever chemicals.

One of those eleven categories is cookware.

The ban took effect on the first of January, 2025. There is no permitted threshold, no trace allowance, no grandfather clause for existing stock. If a pan's cooking surface has a non-stick coating with intentionally added PFAS in it, it cannot lawfully be sold or distributed in the state.

The part that made it a national story

Six days after the ban took effect, an industry group representing many of the largest cookware manufacturers in the United States filed suit in federal court. Their argument was constitutional: that a single state regulating what pans may be sold inside its borders amounts to a burden on interstate commerce, and that the fluoropolymer coatings in question are a different class of compound from the ones that drove the public alarm in the first place. They asked the court to stop the state from enforcing the law while the case was heard.

On the twenty-fifth of February, 2025, the court declined. The state's interest in the documented health and environmental case, the judge held, outweighed the burden on manufacturers. The ban stayed in force.

The group narrowed its arguments and pressed on. On the eleventh of August, 2025, the case was dismissed outright for failure to state a claim.

What the fight was really about

Nothing here settles the underlying science, and this article does not attempt to. The manufacturers maintain their coatings are safe in the pan, that the compounds are FDA-approved for food contact, and that this is a fight about manufacturing and disposal rather than about cooking dinner. That position has serious people behind it and it deserves to be heard.

But strip the constitutional argument back and something plainer is visible underneath. The industry told a federal court that removing the coating would mean rebuilding supply chains, converting manufacturing capacity, and spending enormous sums — or withdrawing from the state entirely.

That is a revealing thing to have to say in a legal filing. The coating is not a feature bolted onto the pan. For a great many manufacturers, the coating is the pan. It is what allows an inexpensive base to behave like an expensive one, for as long as it lasts.

Two brothers who never had the problem

Jones Harrison came up through professional kitchens. His brother Smith spent his career around materials and manufacturing. They started work on Harrison Titanium well before any of this reached a courtroom, and for reasons that had nothing to do with legislation.

"[Every pan I used eventually let me down. Coatings wearing through. Handles working loose. Warping the moment you asked anything of them. At some point you stop accepting that as normal.]" — [quote pending approval]

Smith had been circling the same problem from the supply side, and kept landing on the same material.

"[Titanium is corrosion-resistant, dimensionally stable, and it holds up under heat that ruins other metals. The question was never whether it would work. It was why nobody had bothered.]" — [quote pending approval]

Why almost nobody bothers

The answer is cost, and it is not a small one. Titanium takes longer to work, wastes more material in the process, and punishes mistakes on the line. For most manufacturers that arithmetic ends the discussion before it starts.

There is a second reason, less often said aloud, and the lawsuit made it legible. A coating is a shortcut. Take it away and there is nowhere to hide — the metal underneath is the product, and it either performs or it doesn't.

Harrison Titanium was built without that shortcut. No PFAS, PTFE or PFOA non-stick coatings. A textured titanium cooking surface instead, designed for food release without a layer engineered to wear away on a schedule.

Which meant that when the first state in the country made coated cookware unsellable, Harrison had nothing to change. There was no reformulation, no compliance scramble, no line to convert. The pans were already on the far side of the question.

So why close?

Because the chapter they set out to write is finished, and carrying on would have meant changing how the cookware was made.

"[We could have sold the brand, or handed it to someone who'd keep the name and change the pan. We didn't want that. These were built a certain way. We wanted to finish on our own terms.]" — [quote pending approval]

The consequence for anyone reading this is straightforward. The remaining inventory is going directly to customers at up to 70% off, and when a piece sells out there is no restock behind it.

What's actually in the closing sale

The collection runs from single pans through to full kitchen sets. These are the pieces moving fastest, at the prices they're currently listed at.

Four things to know before you order

No pan is right for everyone, and a closing sale is a bad time to discover a surprise. Four honest notes.

Titanium changes colour. Under high heat it can develop gold, blue or rainbow tints. This is normal for the metal and doesn't mean the pan is damaged.

You still use a little fat. The textured surface releases food well, but a small amount of oil or butter helps with browning and flavour. If you want a pan you can cook a dry egg on until the coating gives out and then replace, this isn't it.

Hand washing is recommended. Not required for durability, but it keeps the finish looking right.

United States shipping only. Orders are processed in one to three business days and typically arrive within two to five after that. There's a 30-day return window from the day your order lands on your doorstep, honoured by [NAMED ENTITY].

The last of it

One state has now decided the coating is a problem worth legislating against, and a federal court has twice declined to get in its way. Whether other states follow is not something anyone can promise you, and this page won't try.

What can be said is narrower and more useful. The Harrisons removed the part that was going to fail, absorbed the cost of doing so, and let the metal speak for itself — years before anyone made them.

That decision is what's now sitting in a warehouse with a price on it. Once each piece is gone, it's gone.