Closing statements from attorneys will take place on the final day of the #FluorideLawsuit this Tuesday, February 20th at 9:30 a.m. (Pacific) / 12:30 (Eastern).

The judge has had time to watch deposition videos, look over evidence, and prepare a series of questions for attorneys. Both the plaintiffs (FAN) and the defendants (EPA) have approximately 40 minutes each for their remarks, though last week the judge said that he would like most of that time to be used to answer his questions, favoring a dialogue rather than presentations.

Our legal team has also advised us that Tuesday’s proceedings will likely be very technical and focused on science and risk assessment.

The hearing will be streamed live for the public on Zoom:

Trial Recording 

Unfortunately, we have some bad news. We’ve just learned that the court changed its position on using the Cameras in the Courtroom program to record the second phase of the trial and post it publicly on their website. As of right now, the court no longer intends to share the recordings with the public. While we don’t know the exact reason for this ruling, I assume it was because the proceedings were live streamed on Zoom. The recording was originally suggested as an alternative to the live stream if that was not permitted by the federal court system, not in addition to it. Our legal team plans to discuss this situation with the judge on Tuesday as well.

Next Steps

As you will see in the interview below featuring FAN’s attorney, Michael Connett, a ruling by the judge can typically occur as soon as a week after closing statements or take as long as a month or two. There’s no clear timeline, but it isn’t expected to take too long. If a ruling is made in our favor, then the EPA can appeal it. An appeal would take much less time in court than our initial trial and would not require re-litigation of the entire scientific case.

If the ruling is in our favor and the EPA either does not appeal or loses their appeal, then use of fluoridation chemicals would be deemed a hazard that poses an unreasonable risk to human health and the EPA would be required to create regulations “requiring one or more of the following actions to the extent necessary so that the chemical substance no longer presents an unreasonable risk:

• Prohibit or otherwise restrict manufacture, processing, or distribution in commerce;
• Prohibit or otherwise restrict for a particular use or above a set concentration;
• Require minimum warnings and instructions with respect to use, distribution in commerce, or disposal;
• Require recordkeeping or testing;
• Prohibit or regulate any manner or method of commercial use;
• Prohibit or regulate any manner or method of disposal; and/or
• Direct manufacturers or processors to give notice of the unreasonable risk to distributors and replace or repurchase products if required.EPA must issue these regulations within specific timelines and in accordance with additional requirements laid out in TSCA section 6(c) (15 U.S.C. §2605).”

Print PDF