The FDA's Proposed Formaldehyde Ban: Where It Actually Stands

CALL 24/7(888) 348-2735

Hair Relaxer Lawsuit — Free, Confidential Consultation

What the FDA’s formaldehyde rule does — and does not — change.

A regulation is not a verdict, and it is not your claim. If you got relaxers for years, one question tells you where you stand.

Active litigation — no settlement. MDL 3060 underway · 11,779 cases pending · filing deadlines vary by state and run from when you knew or should have known.

Did you get relaxers — perms, the white cream — every few weeks, for years?

That one question decides most of it. It seems like nobody ever told you the risk was anything worse than a scalp burn.

See where I standfree · confidential · 2 minutes · an honest answer either way
What the lawsuit is actually about →

No receipts needed · you don’t have to remember every brand · no fee unless there is a recovery. Court costs and litigation expenses are advanced by counsel and repaid from the recovery. You are not responsible for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise. The attorney’s fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before expenses are deducted.

Or talk to a person now: (888) 348-2735 — answered 24/7

Marin & Murphy Law Firm

Every inquiry gets a personal review and a straight answer — including “not yet” or “no” — free and without obligation.

Claims are brought against the companies that made and sold chemical relaxers — not against your stylist, your salon, or the person who did your hair growing up. Conversations are confidential. Some matters may be referred to or handled with other law firms. No settlement has been announced and no trial has been held; every case depends on its own facts. This page does not diagnose anything. Attorney Advertising.

This page is about a lawsuit — it is legal information, not medical advice, and it does not diagnose anything. Questions about your health belong with your own doctor.

Lawsuits consolidated in federal court in Chicago (MDL 3060) allege that long-term use of chemical hair relaxers is associated with uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, and related conditions. As of August 2026 the cases are in pretrial proceedings; no trial has been held and no settlement has been announced. The allegations have not been proven, and each case depends on its own facts.

This page is legal information, not medical advice, and it does not diagnose anything. Questions about your health belong with your own doctor.

It seems like you may have read somewhere that formaldehyde in straighteners was banned, and then noticed that nothing on any shelf changed. Both of those are true at once, and the reason is procedural rather than mysterious.

What the proposed rule is

The entry is titled “Use of Formaldehyde and Formaldehyde-Releasing Chemicals as an Ingredient in Hair Smoothing Products or Hair Straightening Products,” under identifier RIN 0910-AI83. It first appeared in the Spring 2023 Unified Agenda — the twice-yearly list of rules agencies say they intend to write — at “Proposed Rule Stage,” targeting April 2024 for a notice of proposed rulemaking.

The precision matters, and it is the whole of the confusion. A rule announced on the regulatory agenda is a statement of intent. A rule published in the Federal Register opens a comment period and starts the process that can end in a binding requirement. This rule has only ever been the first thing: a Federal Register full-text search on August 25, 2026 returned no FDA rule on hair-smoothing products at all.

The timeline of missed dates

Targets came and went: October 2023, April 2024, November 2024, March 2025, July 2025, December 31, 2025. Asked about the latest miss, FDA said the “proposed rule continues to remain a priority for the Agency,” and that it “may adjust the anticipated publication date.” Members of Congress in April 2025 were blunter: “Since Fall 2024, there has been no further movement or concrete next steps regarding the implementation of the ban.”

What a rule would — and would not — mean for the lawsuits

It would not decide liability. Claims in the federal hair relaxer lawsuit arise under state law: design defect, failure to warn, related theories. An ingredient rule sets what manufacturers must do going forward. It does not adjudicate what a manufacturer knew, warned about, or sold decades ago — the questions at issue.

Its absence is not a verdict either. No court has held that the lack of a published FDA rule defeats these claims. When defendants argued at the pleading stage that federal cosmetics law preempted them, the court overseeing MDL 3060 rejected that argument in November 2023.

A published rule would still matter as evidence. The rulemaking record — the science FDA relies on, the exposure levels it identifies — becomes material both sides can cite.

And it covers a narrower category than many readers assume. Formaldehyde-releasing chemicals are principally an issue in salon keratin smoothing treatments, which are heated during application. Chemical relaxers work differently, through lye or no-lye alkaline agents. The studies behind the litigation looked at straightener and relaxer use broadly and named a mix of chemicals — parabens, bisphenol A, metals, phthalates and formaldehyde among them — as possible contributors. Study findings and adverse-event reports describe associations; they are not verified causation.

What FDA does tell consumers today

FDA maintains a consumer advisory, “Hair Smoothing Products That Release Formaldehyde When Heated,” updated October 15, 2024. Its central sentence: “When the solution is heated, the formaldehyde in the products is released into the air as a gas.” Reactions listed: “watery eyes; burning sensations in the eyes, nose, and throat, coughing, wheezing, nausea, and skin irritation.” Its advice: read labels for formaldehyde, formalin or methylene glycol, ask salons for the Safety Data Sheet, report reactions. The advisory does not mention the proposed rule.

The adverse-event database, and what it does not tell us

FDA runs a public database called CAERS — the CFSAN Adverse Event Reporting System — which “contains information on food, dietary supplement, and cosmetic product adverse events submitted to FDA,” with data back to 2014. Anyone can search it.

It holds voluntary, unverified reports; FDA’s guidance is to treat results as unvalidated. A report is someone saying something happened, not a finding that a product caused it. Relaxer-specific and brand-specific counts are not published here, because no number goes up that is not a recorded, dated query.

If you used relaxers long-term

Nothing on this page requires you to have followed any of it. A review takes about two minutes to start, asks for no receipts and no brand names, and ends with a person telling you where you stand — usually within a business day, and an answer either way. What it works from:

• Used a chemical hair relaxer at least four times a year for at least two years.
• A diagnosis of uterine, endometrial or ovarian cancer, fibroids, or another reproductive condition.
• Some way to place the use in time — years, salon, brand, or your own account.
• Willingness to have records requested with your written permission.

Whether you qualify is decided by a review of your facts, not a webpage. The consultation is free and confidential, and there is no fee unless there is a recovery. Some matters may be referred to or handled with other law firms.

Frequently Asked Questions

Cases are handled on a contingent-fee basis: no fee unless there is a recovery. The attorney’s fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before case expenses are deducted. Case expenses are advanced by the firm and reimbursed to the firm out of the recovery only if there is a recovery. You have no liability for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise.