New York Attorney General Letitia James sued several major chemical and manufacturing companies on July 9, accusing them of selling products containing PFAS — per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — long after the firms knew the compounds posed health and environmental risks.
Claims of concealment and persistent contamination
The complaint names industry giants including 3M and DuPont, alleging the companies continued to expose consumers to products with PFAS and withheld information about their dangers. James said the defendants “knowingly sold toxic products” that threatened New Yorkers’ health and polluted the environment.
“Big companies like 3M and DuPont knowingly sold toxic products that threatened New Yorkers’ health and polluted our environment for decades,” the attorney general said.
PFAS — often called “forever chemicals” — do not readily break down and accumulate in the environment and in people’s bodies, the suit notes. The Environmental Protection Agency and other federal agencies have linked certain PFAS to a range of health problems.
Where PFAS are found and the health evidence
According to the complaint and referenced federal findings, PFAS have been used in consumer goods and everyday items, including:
- nonstick cookware
- makeup
- dental floss
- food packaging
- some textiles such as certain leggings
The Environmental Protection Agency has associated PFAS exposure with an increased risk of cancer, metabolic disorders, reduced fertility in women and developmental delays in children. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found that nearly all Americans have PFAS in their blood, underscoring the ubiquity of exposure.
Advocates and experts weigh in
Judith Enck, president of the advocacy group Beyond Plastics and a former Environmental Protection Agency official, characterized the lawsuit as a major step toward accountability, calling the action “a blockbuster legal action that should hold these companies” — language echoed in the AG’s announcement that the state seeks responsibility for damages and cleanup.
Local implications and next steps
For New Yorkers, the suit raises immediate questions about consumer safety, drinking-water protections and environmental cleanup. The complaint seeks to address both past harms and future risks by pursuing remedies from companies that the state says continued to market products containing PFAS despite evidence of harms.
| Data point | Source cited |
|---|---|
| Health risks linked to PFAS | U.S. EPA |
| Population-level exposure | CDC (nearly everyone in U.S. has PFAS in blood) |
The state complaint sets the stage for what could be lengthy litigation over internal industry knowledge, timelines of product use and the scope of contamination. For residents concerned about exposure, public-health agencies and local water authorities remain the primary sources of guidance on testing and mitigation.
