Makeup lawsuits in the United States currently cluster around four allegations: PFAS “forever chemicals” in cosmetics, asbestos contamination in talcum powder, cancer risks tied to chemical hair relaxers, and deceptive marketing claims like “clean,” “natural,” and “hypoallergenic.” Together these cases involve tens of thousands of plaintiffs, verdicts in the hundreds of millions, and nearly every major brand on the beauty aisle.
PFAS “Forever Chemicals” Cases
A 2021 study by researchers at the University of Notre Dame, Indiana University, and the University of Toronto tested more than 230 cosmetics sold in the U.S. and Canada and found high fluorine levels, an indicator of PFAS, in 56% of foundations, 56% of eye products, 48% of lip products, and 47% of mascaras. Roughly nine out of ten waterproof mascaras tested positive, compared with about one in ten regular versions. Only one of 29 products containing between four and 13 specific PFAS compounds listed any of them on the label.1University of Notre Dame. Use of PFAS in Cosmetics Widespread, New Study Finds2CBS News. Forever Chemicals PFAS in Personal Care Products
The study set off a wave of class actions. In Hicks et al. v. L’Oréal USA, Inc., filed in the Southern District of New York, plaintiffs claimed L’Oréal and Maybelline waterproof mascaras contained undisclosed PFAS despite being marketed as “ophthalmologist and allergy tested.”3ClassAction.org. L’Oreal Maybelline Waterproof Mascaras Contain Toxic PFAS, Class Action Alleges A federal judge dismissed the case in September 2023, finding that plaintiffs had not adequately shown the specific mascaras they bought actually contained PFAS; the Notre Dame study had not tested L’Oréal products, and the plaintiffs’ own testing lacked detail.4Bloomberg Law. L’Oreal Mascara Buyers Lack Standing for PFAS Deception Lawsuit
Other suits are still active. Almay and parent Revlon were sued in 2022 in the Southern District of New York (Anderson et al. v. Almay, Inc. et al., No. 1:22-cv-02722) over “clean” marketing allegedly belied by PFAS content.5Top Class Actions. Almay Makeup Contains Harmful Substances, Nationwide Class Action Alleges Burt’s Bees drew two class actions in early 2022, one alleging undisclosed PFAS and another challenging the “100% Natural” claim.6Top Class Actions. Burt’s Bees CoverGirl Class Action Alleges Products Contain PFAS
Canadian regulators have moved faster than U.S. courts. In January 2026, Estée Lauder Cosmetics Ltd. pleaded guilty in the Ontario Court of Justice to two counts of violating Canada’s Environmental Protection Act. Inspectors had found in May 2023 that the company was selling eyeliners containing perfluorononyl dimethicone without the required government notice, and the company then failed to comply with a June 2023 compliance order. Estée Lauder was fined $750,000, ordered to notify its shareholders, and listed on Canada’s Environmental Offenders Registry.7Government of Canada. Estee Lauder Cosmetics Fined for Violating the Canadian Environmental Protection Act8WWD. Estee Lauder Fined by Canada for Environmental Violations
Talcum Powder and Asbestos Lawsuits
The largest body of cosmetics litigation involves talc. Plaintiffs allege that talc-based powders were contaminated with asbestos and caused cancer, mostly mesothelioma and ovarian cancer. Johnson & Johnson sits at the center, facing more than 90,000 lawsuits, with over 67,000 claims consolidated in multidistrict litigation (MDL 2738) in the U.S. District Court for New Jersey.9Drugwatch. Talcum Powder Settlements
J&J tried to resolve the mass litigation through a “Texas Two-Step” bankruptcy, placing a new subsidiary called Red River Talc LLC into Chapter 11. A Texas bankruptcy judge rejected the plan in March 2025, finding the voting process flawed and claimant support insufficient. J&J said it would not appeal, would return to the tort system, and intended to “litigate every filed case.” The company reversed roughly $7 billion previously reserved for a bankruptcy resolution.10Johnson & Johnson. Johnson and Johnson to Return to Tort System
Recent verdicts have been large:
- December 2025: A Baltimore jury awarded $1.5 billion to a Maryland woman with mesothelioma. Separate juries awarded $65.5 million in Minnesota (mesothelioma) and $40 million in Los Angeles (ovarian cancer).
- October 2025: A Los Angeles jury returned $966 million in a mesothelioma case. The judge later struck $950 million in punitive damages, leaving $16 million in compensatory damages. The plaintiff is appealing.
- July 2025: A Massachusetts jury awarded $42 million to a mesothelioma patient.
- May 2026: A Minnesota jury awarded $10.2 million to a man diagnosed with mesothelioma after using products from Gold Bond, Merck, and J&J.9Drugwatch. Talcum Powder Settlements
Other defendants have taken different routes. Avon filed for bankruptcy in August 2024 and now handles its talc claims through an asbestos trust. Talc supplier Imerys Talc America created an $862 million trust after its own bankruptcy. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, a former industrial talc producer, filed for bankruptcy in 2023 with over 2,700 lawsuits pending. Colgate-Palmolive has lost multiple verdicts tied to its discontinued Cashmere Bouquet powder. In April 2026, the family of a 63-year-old woman who died of mesothelioma filed suit in San Francisco Superior Court against 14 cosmetics and retail defendants, including Chanel, L’Oréal, Mary Kay, CVS, and Target.11Mesothelioma.net. Family Files Mesothelioma Wrongful Death Lawsuit Against 14 Cosmetic Talc Companies
Chemical Hair Relaxer and Straightener Claims
A separate mass litigation targets chemical hair relaxers and straighteners. A 2022 National Institutes of Health study linked frequent use (more than four times a year) with higher uterine cancer risk. Plaintiffs allege manufacturers knew these products contained endocrine disruptors and carcinogens including formaldehyde, phthalates, and parabens, but did not warn consumers.12Motley Rice. Hair Straightener Lawsuit
The cases are consolidated in MDL No. 3060 in the Northern District of Illinois before Judge Mary M. Rowland. As of May 2026, the docket held 11,526 pending actions. Bellwether cases have been selected, Daubert motions on expert testimony are due in November 2026, and first trials are expected in 2027. No settlements have been paid. Named defendants include L’Oréal, Revlon, SoftSheen-Carson, and Sally Beauty, along with more than a dozen others. In February 2025, Judge Rowland denied motions to dismiss filed by several defendants.13Motley Rice. Hair Relaxer Lawsuit
The litigation carries a civil rights dimension. The complaints note that these products were marketed heavily to Black and brown women, who make up roughly 60% of U.S. customers for chemical straighteners.14City of Los Angeles City Attorney. City Attorney Settles With Keratin Hair Treatment Manufacturer The FDA has proposed banning hair-straightening products containing formaldehyde but had not finalized the rule as of early 2026.
False Advertising and Label Lawsuits
A fast-growing category challenges beauty marketing itself. The claims take aim at labels like “hypoallergenic,” “clean,” “natural,” and “biodegradable” when the ingredient list says otherwise.
In May 2026, a class action was filed against Conopco, Inc., a Unilever subsidiary, in the Northern District of California, alleging that Dove Sensitive Hypoallergenic Body Wash contains d-Limonene, a known skin allergen, despite being marketed as hypoallergenic (Mills et al. v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:26-cv-04286).15Top Class Actions. Dove Class Action Claims Body Wash Falsely Advertised as Hypoallergenic
Ulta Beauty is defending a nationwide class action, Garvey v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc., No. 25-cv-5965 (N.D. Cal.), alleging that its “Conscious Beauty” program labels products as having “Clean Ingredients” even when those products contain substances on Ulta’s own prohibited list. The complaint identifies specific items from Dermalogica, Drunk Elephant, L’Oréal, and Ulta’s own brand. The case was pending as of late 2025.16Cosmetics and Toiletries. Class Action Against Ulta Beauty Over Clean Ingredient Claims Advances
Early-2026 filings alone include suits against Amazon Basics body wash (labeled “hypoallergenic”), Mario Badescu facial spray (advertised as containing rosewater when it allegedly contained rosehip extract), Dove Men’s deodorant (labeled “no alcohol” despite containing benzyl alcohol), and The Body Firm (accused of advertising fake limited-time discounts).17ClassAction.org. Beauty Class Action Lawsuits
Infections From In-Store Testers
A smaller line of suits involves shared makeup samples at store counters. Elena Davoyan sued Sephora in 2017 in Los Angeles Superior Court, claiming she contracted oral herpes from a lipstick tester at a Hollywood store in 2015. The case settled in April 2019, with Sephora saying it resolved the matter “while continuing to deny all of the allegations.”18NBC Los Angeles. Woman Settles Oral Herpes Suit With Makeup Giant Sephora19New York Post. Woman Sues MAC Claiming Their Makeover Gave Her an Eye Infection20ABC7 New York. Ocular Herpes Makeup Counter Pennsylvania MAC Lawsuit
Recent Settlement Amounts
Several beauty class actions have resolved recently, giving a sense of what these cases pay:
- Rodan + Fields: $38 million over claims that its Lash Boost product was a misbranded drug containing an undisclosed active ingredient.21Top Class Actions. Makeup Class Actions and Settlements Target Harmful Ingredients in Cosmetics
- Neutrogena: $4.7 million for alleged violations of Illinois biometric information privacy laws (February 2026).
- Athena Cosmetics: $4.17 million over alleged undisclosed side effects of lash and brow serums (January 2026).
- Unilever dry shampoo brands: $3.625 million covering Suave, Dove, TRESemmé, and other brands over alleged benzene contamination (May 2025).
- Charlotte Tilbury: $2.925 million over alleged illegal collection of facial geometry scans from Illinois consumers through a virtual try-on tool (October 2024).
- Lilly Lashes: $500,000 over allegations that mink fur eyelashes were falsely advertised as “cruelty-free” (April 2025).17ClassAction.org. Beauty Class Action Lawsuits
How MoCRA Changed the Ground Rules
Much of this litigation is unfolding alongside the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022, the biggest expansion of FDA authority over cosmetics since 1938. MoCRA requires companies to register their facilities, list products and ingredients with the FDA, report serious adverse health events within 15 business days, and maintain safety substantiation. The FDA can now also order mandatory recalls when a company refuses to pull a product that poses a serious health risk.22FDA. Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA)
As of early 2026, the FDA reported more than 14,000 active facility registrations and nearly 993,000 active product listings. The agency has started issuing warning letters, released draft guidance on mandatory recalls in December 2025, and launched a public dashboard in September 2025 for adverse event reports tied to cosmetics.23FDA. Registration and Listing of Cosmetic Product Facilities and Products That dashboard gives consumers and plaintiffs’ attorneys a way to spot safety patterns before a lawsuit is filed, and it is likely to feed the next round of cases.