Archive for water pollution

Seattle Sues Monsanto Over Duwamish River Pollution

Seattle Sues Monsanto Over Duwamish River Pollution

The City of Seattle has filed a high-profile lawsuit against Monsanto, seeking compensation for environmental damages caused by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) contaminating the Duwamish River. The case centers around the alleged long-term effects of Monsanto’s chemical products, which have polluted the riverbed and surrounding ecosystems, leading to costly cleanup operations and public health concerns.

Seattle alleges that Monsanto manufactured and sold PCBs for decades—well after the company was aware of their toxicity and environmental persistence. Although the production of PCBs was banned in 1979 by the EPA, these chemicals have remained in the environment, especially in waterways like the Duwamish, where industrial activity has contributed to their spread.

The lawsuit claims that Monsanto is solely responsible for producing over 99% of all PCBs in the United States and that it prioritized profit over public safety by continuing to distribute the chemicals despite knowing their harmful effects. According to city officials, the contamination has disproportionately affected low-income and indigenous communities living near the river, many of whom rely on local fish as a food source.

The Duwamish River has been classified as a Superfund site by the Environmental Protection Agency, and cleanup efforts are expected to cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Seattle argues that taxpayers should not bear the financial burden of addressing pollution caused by a single corporation’s negligence.

In previous lawsuits across the country, Monsanto has already faced similar claims from cities like San Diego, San Jose, and Spokane. Many of those cases have resulted in substantial settlements. Seattle’s legal team is expected to pursue both compensatory and punitive damages in an attempt to recover funds and send a strong message regarding corporate accountability.

Legal analysts note that the case could have broader implications for corporate environmental liability. If Seattle is successful, other municipalities with similar PCB contamination issues may be encouraged to file their own lawsuits against Monsanto or other legacy polluters.

Monsanto, which was acquired by Bayer in 2018, has responded by asserting that the current company should not be held liable for actions taken before the acquisition. However, U.S. courts have often ruled that corporate successors can be held responsible for the liabilities of acquired entities.

This lawsuit reflects a growing trend in environmental litigation, where cities and states are holding major corporations accountable for pollution that endangers public health and natural resources. The case is currently pending in King County Superior Court and could take years to resolve, but its outcome will likely influence future environmental lawsuits nationwide.

Camp Lejeune Toxic Water Lawsuit Expands to Contractors

Camp Lejeune Toxic Water Lawsuit Expands to Contractors

Victims of toxic water exposure at Camp Lejeune, a U.S. Marine Corps base in North Carolina, have expanded their legal battle by filing new lawsuits against private contractors who allegedly played a role in the decades-long contamination. The lawsuits claim that these third-party companies either failed to report the dangers or contributed directly to the pollution of the base’s water supply.

From the 1950s through the late 1980s, hundreds of thousands of Marines, their families, and civilian workers were exposed to water contaminated with dangerous chemicals like trichloroethylene (TCE), perchloroethylene (PCE), benzene, and vinyl chloride—substances linked to cancer, birth defects, and neurological issues.

Until recently, most lawsuits focused on the federal government. But thanks to recent amendments under the Camp Lejeune Justice Act, victims now have a clearer path to sue private contractors involved in facility maintenance, waste disposal, and environmental monitoring. Plaintiffs argue that these companies knew or should have known about the risks and failed to act.

The expanded lawsuits allege that contractors negligently installed and maintained leaking fuel tanks, dumped toxic waste near water supplies, and ignored test results that flagged contamination levels above federal safety thresholds. Attorneys claim the contractors prioritized cost-cutting and speed over public health, contributing to one of the worst environmental scandals in military history.

Lawyers representing victims say the litigation is a key step in uncovering the full extent of responsibility and recovering compensation for decades of pain and illness. “Holding contractors accountable is just as important as holding the government accountable,” said one attorney representing several families. “Everyone involved in allowing this tragedy to continue must face justice.”

Many plaintiffs include former service members suffering from leukemia, Parkinson’s disease, bladder cancer, and infertility—conditions widely documented in connection to long-term exposure to the contaminants present in Camp Lejeune’s water.

Legal experts believe these lawsuits could open the door to similar claims at other contaminated military sites, particularly as more transparency laws emerge around environmental hazards and contractor accountability.

The federal government has paid out over $2 billion in health-related claims tied to Camp Lejeune so far, and the growing number of lawsuits could dramatically increase the financial liability across public and private sectors. Some contractors named in the suits have denied wrongdoing, stating they followed federal guidance at the time.

The case adds momentum to broader calls for reform in how environmental health risks are managed at military bases. Advocates continue to push for mandatory third-party oversight and stricter environmental review processes.

As the first wave of contractor trials prepares to begin later this year, victims and their families remain hopeful that justice will finally be delivered—not just in words, but in court.