• @Bell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      247 months ago

      40 Billion isn’t enough either, they’ve literally poisoned the entire planet and every human on it with PFAS.

      • El Barto
        link
        fedilink
        27 months ago

        You know who also poisoned the planet? The plants. Yup. That oxygen shit made the planet flammable. Asshole plants.

        (Just joking; but yeah, fucking forever chemicals)

        • YeetPics
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          The thing is 0² is quite reactive and the bonds are usually pretty easy to break. Compare that to fluorine-carbon bonds and you’ll see why this is an issue.

          • El Barto
            link
            fedilink
            17 months ago

            Well, oxygen is going nowhere too. So, yeah, I see why it is an issue.

  • KinNectar
    link
    fedilink
    177 months ago

    Hell yeah, about time for a wave of similar lawsuits to force a crackdown on forever chemicals.

  • @dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    107 months ago

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to review a $40 million verdict against E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co, preserving a legal win for an Ohio man who said toxic “forever chemicals” released by the company into drinking water caused his cancer.

    For the Lemmy Brain jumping to conclusions.

    • @Coasting0942@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      17 months ago

      Obviously DuPont competitors own the court and want a consistent legal framework where their own chemical use isn’t investigated too closely.

      /s

    • @SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      187 months ago

      Dupont was appealing to get it reduced, though. If the Supreme Court was on their side, they would have taken the appeal.

      • Bone
        link
        fedilink
        9
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Whenever the Supreme Court won’t take a case, it’s important to see why. It always defers to a lower court’s ruling. And a lot of the time it’s the opposite of what you may think, which is good in the end.

    • NaibofTabr
      link
      English
      14
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to review a $40 million verdict against E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co, preserving a legal win for an Ohio man who said toxic “forever chemicals” released by the company into drinking water caused his cancer.

      […]

      The 6th Circuit upheld the lower court’s decision, finding it was right to conclude that DuPont’s behavior impacted the plaintiffs in virtually identical ways, so it was appropriate to bar the company from relitigating arguments it had repeatedly lost before.

      In this case, refusing to review the case protected the win for the plaintiff and shut down DuPont’s attempt to avoid paying.

      Of course, Thomas and Kavanaugh did some brown-nosing for their corporate overlords:

      Dissenting from the high court’s decision not to grant review, Justice Clarence Thomas said Monday the bellwether trials were not meant to be representative of all the cases in the multidistrict litigation, and DuPont should not have been barred from contesting elements of negligence found in those earlier cases.

      Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he would have heard the case.