In March 2023, CAL sued açaí multinational Sambazon under Washington D.C.’s consumer protection statute for misleading consumers about its sourcing practices. Sustainability and ethical sourcing constitute cornerstones of Sambazon’s marketing, while açaí production continues to be a process rife with hazardous child labor. This summer we have successfully overcome efforts to dismiss the case on procedural grounds, and we are pushing forward to hold Sambazon accountable to the truth. This blog post first describes why this decision is a win for CAL and broader efforts to hold companies accountable for misleading consumers. It then presents insights from two investigations in Brazil which underscore that hazardous child labor persists as a feature of an industry.
Recent Decision Rolled Back Alarming Precedent
CAL brought this suit under the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act, or “CPPA,” which is unique in that it provides the possibility for public interest organizations (including non-profits like CAL) to bring cases on behalf of consumers for deceptive or misleading trade practices. Case law at the appellate level has underscored that the Council of the District of Columbia intended to provide a more permissive basis for standing – meaning who has the right to bring a lawsuit – to ensure vigorous enforcement of consumer rights by organizations dedicated to such causes.
Therefore, CAL was surprised and disappointed when, in November 2023, the court dismissed our case on the basis that the law of California, where Sambazon is based and may have produced its misleading advertising, should have applied. Under California’s rules, CAL would not have standing to sue. This decision ran contrary to the CPPA’s purpose as we understand it, as it would make it more challenging for organizations to use this statute as it was intended. This decision carved out much of what made the statute a unique tool to challenge companies that mislead consumers, and meant we would have no legal forum to bring this case.
Needless to say, we appealed.
On August 14, 2025 the appeals court overturned the dismissal. It found that both Washington, D.C. and California have reasons to apply their own laws to this case, but disagreed with the trial court’s analysis that key factors weigh in favor of California. The case has now been sent back to the trial court, where we may have to stave off Sambazon’s additional arguments for dismissal. Progress through courts can be slow, but we are enthusiastic about fighting off a ruling that would make the CPPA more difficult to use as a tool for consumer protection, while getting one step closer to the heart of this case.
Açaí is a diet staple in Pará, served as a chilled puree alongside meals. It spoils quickly, so families regularly buy it fresh from small açaí shops across the city.
Child labor continues to be a feature of the industry
In the almost two years since we filed the lawsuit, CAL investigations have underscored that hazardous child labor remains a feature of the açaí industry. As described in our previous blog post, açaí harvesters are very often children who can more easily climb the tall, thin palms without causing them to break. They often do so without protective equipment, scaling the trees holding machetes and coming down with heavy bushels of berries, with nothing but a small piece of burlap around their feet. A fall from the trees, which can grow upwards of 65 or even 80 feet, can be deadly. The industry’s reliance on child labor has landed açaí on the U.S. Department of Labor’s list of goods made with child labor or forced labor.
The fruit is a traditional source of sustenance for the remote communities indigenous to these regions, eaten as chilled puree alongside meals. Families living along the river, known as “ribeirinhos,” harvest açaí for their own consumption and sell it to middlemen who travel through the network of rivers to purchase açaí, often at a low price, and transport it to larger ports where they can turn a profit. These middlemen do not know how the fruit was picked (and whether children were involved), and these sales often take place without a written contract. Buyers at the ports regularly do not, and even cannot, know exactly where the berries were originally purchased.
Sambazon advertises that it maintains relationships with harvesters, pointing in its 2024 impact plan to a “palm to palm” system of direct communication that involves visits and a recently launched app. The plan does not explicitly acknowledge or address the question of child labor in the communities from which Sambazon sources.
Açaí market in the city of Belém, where fruit middlemen purchased throughout the region is brought for sale.
Profits are not making their way to communities producing açaí
In May 2025, CAL staff traveled to Pará, the state in Brazil which produces over 90% of the country’s açaí. A new legislative working group based in the state’s capital is working to establish basic standardization and protection in the industry. Representatives reported to CAL that increasing international demand has not significantly changed how açaí is picked and sold, or the price that families at the beginning of this supply chain are paid. Participating professors from the Federal University of Pará emphasised that “many of the people getting rich from açaí have never climbed a tree.”
Without a designated tax on açaí, the wealth generated by this increasingly valuable product also has not resulted in sufficient state resources to support children in harvesting communities. Local leaders in the city of Igarapé-Miri, known as the “capital of açaí” for its eleven local facilities processing açaí, were adamant that while açaí sales have uplifted some families from abject poverty, children still often skip school to help their families. Even if they finish school, they lack alternative educational or career opportunities that could keep them in the region.
Initiatives that identify and tackle child labor remain nascent. However, a municipal commission in Igarapé-Miri has developed a strategy for eradicating child labor. Detailing the plan, a representative told CAL that “while people have a lot of demands from the government, companies don’t take responsibility.” He emphasized that the local government needs proper data about the enduring presence of child labor, but it is difficult to garner the resources necessary to collect that information.
CAL Staff speak with representatives of cooperatives, associations and local government in the city of Igarapé-Miri.
While the global market for açaí has boomed, changes to this traditional industry in Brazil have been much slower. Hazardous child labor remains embedded in the harvesting process, and profits still largely bypass the communities doing the hardest work. The açaí industry has an opportunity to evolve in a way that genuinely supports the communities that sustain it. But that evolution won’t come without pressure. CAL will continue pushing to make that change a reality.
Alev Erhan is a staff attorney at CAL.
