Hair relaxer lawsuit update (April 2025): Lawsuits against manufacturers of chemical hair relaxers continue to build momentum as new plaintiffs step forward with claims of serious health consequences, including uterine, ovarian, and endometrial cancer. With thousands of cases now consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL), and growing scientific evidence suggesting a link between long-term hair relaxer use and hormone-related cancers, the legal landscape is shifting rapidly.
Table of Contents
If you or a loved one has used chemical hair straighteners and later developed cancer or reproductive health issues, you may have grounds for a claim. Call our mass tort lawyers at Ankin Law now at 312-600-0000. Free consult.
Surge in Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
As of April 1, 2025, at least 9,936 lawsuits had been filed and centralized in the Northern District of Illinois under Judge Mary Rowland. These cases form MDL 3060, created to streamline pretrial proceedings for individuals claiming that long-term use of hair relaxers led to serious illnesses.
On April 9, 2025, Judge Mary M. Rowland issued Case Management Order 16, allowing plaintiffs whose cases were previously dismissed without prejudice to rejoin the litigation by submitting new plaintiff fact sheets within 10 days.
The hair relaxer lawsuits target major cosmetic manufacturers, including L’Oréal, Revlon, SoftSheen-Carson, and Strength of Nature, among others. Plaintiffs allege that these companies knowingly marketed dangerous products to consumers, especially Black and Latina women, without adequate warnings about the associated health risks.
The first bellwether trial in the hair relaxer MDL is scheduled to begin in May 2025, and discovery is well underway. The court has begun selecting representative claims to help assess liability and settlement ranges. These early trials will offer critical insight into how juries may respond to the claims and evidence.
Scientific Basis Behind the Claims
The surge in litigation follows a 2022 study published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which found that women who used chemical hair straighteners frequently were more than twice as likely to develop uterine cancer than non-users. The study, which tracked more than 33,000 women over 11 years, has been cited in nearly every complaint filed in the MDL.
Researchers pointed to the presence of endocrine-disrupting chemicals in many hair relaxers, such as phthalates and parabens. These chemicals can interfere with hormone regulation, potentially increasing the risk of hormone-sensitive cancers.
Further studies have connected chemical hair straighteners to increased risks of breast cancer, endometriosis, and fibroids, which disproportionately affect Black women—many of whom have used these products from a young age, often without knowledge of the risks.
Who Can File a Hair Relaxer Lawsuit?
Women who developed uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, endometrial cancer, or other hormone-related illnesses after regular use of chemical hair straighteners may be eligible to file a lawsuit. Most plaintiffs used these products for years before receiving their diagnoses. In many cases, the diagnosis came at a relatively young age and required surgery, chemotherapy, or other invasive treatments.
To pursue a claim, potential plaintiffs must show:
- A history of using chemical hair relaxers, often starting in adolescence or early adulthood
- A subsequent diagnosis of a hormone-related cancer or reproductive disorder
- No prior family history that clearly accounts for the diagnosis
- That the diagnosis occurred within a plausible latency period following exposure
Each case will be evaluated based on the individual’s medical records, product usage history, and personal health profile.
What the Lawsuits Allege
The core allegation across the MDL is that manufacturers of hair relaxers failed to warn consumers of the health risks associated with prolonged exposure to their products. Many complaints go further, accusing these companies of targeting vulnerable communities with deceptive marketing campaigns that encouraged frequent and long-term use, despite internal knowledge of the dangers.
Internal documents obtained through discovery may play a key role in proving whether the manufacturers were aware of the risks and chose profit over consumer safety. If these documents reveal evidence of corporate misconduct—such as ignoring early safety studies or suppressing unfavorable research—defendants could be exposed to substantial punitive damages.
Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Explained
MDL 3060 is not a class action. Unlike class actions, where plaintiffs are treated as a single group and typically receive uniform compensation, MDL cases remain individual lawsuits that are consolidated for efficiency during the pretrial phase.
Once the bellwether trials begin, the outcomes will guide the direction of the remaining claims. A strong verdict for plaintiffs could encourage global settlement negotiations, while a string of defense wins might force plaintiffs to reconsider their litigation strategy. Regardless, each case will retain its own facts, and individual plaintiffs will still have the option to settle or proceed to trial.
Recent Legal Developments and Timeline
So far, the court has ruled on several preliminary motions, including:
- Denying defendants’ requests to dismiss many of the core claims
- Approving a plaintiff leadership structure
- Setting protocols for discovery and expert testimony
The first bellwether trials will test different types of claims, including uterine cancer and endometrial cancer, to gauge how juries respond to various kinds of medical evidence.
In the meantime, new claims continue to be filed. Individuals who suspect they have a claim should not wait too long, as the statute of limitations in product liability cases is typically two to three years from diagnosis or the date the injury was discovered—or reasonably should have been discovered.
Disproportionate Impact on Black and Latina Women
A recurring theme in the lawsuits is the disproportionate harm faced by Black and Latina women. These groups have historically been the primary consumers of chemical hair relaxers due to beauty standards in workplaces and schools, as well as cultural pressure to conform to Eurocentric hair norms.
Plaintiffs allege that cosmetic companies took advantage of this market by creating aggressive marketing campaigns that framed natural hair as unprofessional or unattractive. In doing so, manufacturers allegedly encouraged generations of women to apply harsh chemicals to their scalps every few weeks—sometimes starting as early as age 8 or 9.
The legal filings argue that this pattern of marketing constituted not just negligence, but also exploitation and systemic harm. Some plaintiffs’ attorneys have drawn comparisons to litigation over tobacco and talcum powder, where vulnerable communities were also disproportionately affected.
Types of Damages Sought
Plaintiffs are seeking compensation for a range of losses, including:
- Medical expenses related to diagnosis and treatment
- Lost income due to illness or disability
- Pain and suffering
- Emotional distress
- Loss of fertility
- Punitive damages in cases involving willful misconduct
In wrongful death cases, surviving family members may also seek damages for loss of companionship, funeral costs, and the economic contributions the deceased would have provided.
As the litigation progresses, settlements or verdicts could result in large payouts for individual plaintiffs, particularly in cases involving permanent injury, aggressive cancers, or proven manufacturer negligence. Estimates suggest that strong uterine cancer cases could result in settlements ranging from $150,000 to $750,000, with significantly higher amounts possible for cases involving younger plaintiffs or more severe outcomes.
Industry Pushback and Defense Strategies
Defendants in the MDL have pushed back hard, denying all allegations and arguing that their products are safe when used as directed. They challenge the validity of the NIH study and claim there is no conclusive evidence proving that their specific products cause cancer. They also emphasize that many of the studies cite correlation, not causation.
Defense attorneys are expected to argue that plaintiffs had other risk factors—such as obesity, genetics, or hormonal imbalances—that contributed to their diagnoses. They may also question plaintiffs’ product usage histories or suggest that the cancer could have been caused by other sources of endocrine-disrupting chemicals.
However, plaintiffs’ counsel has already retained prominent epidemiologists and toxicologists to testify about the cumulative risks posed by regular exposure to these chemical formulations.
What to Expect in 2025
The MDL is likely to continue expanding through 2025 as more women become aware of the risks associated with hair relaxer products. Public health advocacy, social media campaigns, and legal outreach have all helped bring attention to the issue.
Key developments to watch for in the coming months include:
- Completion of expert discovery and depositions
- Daubert hearings on the admissibility of scientific evidence
- Finalization of bellwether trial selections
- Continued filings of new cases, especially from historically underrepresented groups
When Will the Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Be Settled? Depending on how these events unfold, settlement negotiations could begin by late 2025 or early 2026.
What You Should Do If You’ve Been Affected
If you’ve been diagnosed with a reproductive cancer after long-term use of chemical hair straighteners, you may be entitled to compensation. At Ankin Law, we’re closely monitoring developments in the MDL and evaluating claims for affected individuals. Early action is critical to protect your rights and to ensure important medical and product usage records are preserved.
Contact our team at 312-600-0000 for a free consultation to discuss whether your circumstances may qualify for a hair relaxer lawsuit. We understand the emotional, physical, and financial burden that comes with a cancer diagnosis, and we’re here to provide the guidance and advocacy you need.
