PFAS lawsuits involve legal claims brought by individuals, communities, and government entities harmed by exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of synthetic chemicals commonly referred to as “forever chemicals.” These substances have been used for decades in firefighting foam, non-stick cookware, waterproof clothing, food packaging, and industrial applications. Because PFAS do not break down easily in the environment or the human body, they can accumulate over time, leading to serious health and environmental concerns.

The core allegation in PFAS lawsuits is that chemical manufacturers knew or should have known about the dangers associated with PFAS exposure but failed to adequately warn the public, regulators, and consumers. Plaintiffs claim that long-term exposure to PFAS has been linked to serious health conditions, including certain cancers, liver damage, immune system suppression, thyroid disease, high cholesterol, and reproductive and developmental problems. Many lawsuits focus on contamination of drinking water supplies near military bases, airports, industrial facilities, and firefighting training sites where PFAS-based firefighting foam, known as AFFF, was heavily used.

A large portion of PFAS litigation has been consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL) in federal court. This consolidation allows thousands of similar cases from across the country to be managed together during pretrial proceedings. The MDL includes personal injury claims, water contamination lawsuits brought by cities and utilities, and property damage claims. Central issues in the litigation include whether manufacturers concealed known risks, whether PFAS exposure caused specific diseases, and whether safer alternatives were available but not used.

Individuals bringing PFAS lawsuits often allege that they were unknowingly exposed through contaminated drinking water or consumer products and later developed serious medical conditions. These plaintiffs seek compensation for medical expenses, ongoing treatment, lost income, pain and suffering, and reduced quality of life. Municipalities and water providers, meanwhile, seek reimbursement for the enormous costs of water testing, filtration systems, and long-term cleanup required to remove PFAS from public water supplies.

The companies named in PFAS lawsuits, including major chemical manufacturers, argue that PFAS products were approved for use at the time and complied with existing regulations. They also dispute causation, claiming that scientific evidence does not conclusively link PFAS exposure to every condition alleged. Despite these defenses, internal documents and emerging research have played a significant role in advancing plaintiffs’ claims and driving settlement discussions in some cases.

PFAS lawsuits are still evolving, but they represent one of the largest environmental and public health litigations in U.S. history. As scientific research continues and regulatory standards tighten, these cases are expected to influence future chemical safety practices, environmental accountability, and public health protections. For individuals and communities affected by PFAS contamination, litigation remains a critical pathway to seek accountability and financial recovery.