Minnesota just took L’Oréal to court, saying the beauty giant sold hair relaxers to Black women and girls while hiding cancer risks that state lawyers say the company knew or should have known about.
Story Highlights
- Minnesota alleges L’Oréal deceived Black consumers about cancer risks tied to chemical relaxers.
- The complaint cites studies linking frequent relaxer use with higher uterine and ovarian cancer risk.
- L’Oréal says its products are safe, follow regulations, and the science does not prove causation.
- The state seeks penalties, restitution, and health warnings on future sales.
Minnesota’s Case: Who Is Sued and What Is Alleged
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison filed a lawsuit against several L’Oréal entities and SoftSheen-Carson. The complaint lists product lines including Dark & Lovely, Optimum, Mizani, Bantu, Care Free Curl, Look of Radiance, and Ultra Precise. The state alleges violations of three consumer-protection laws: the Prevention of Consumer Fraud Act, the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and the False Statement in Advertising Act. The filing argues that L’Oréal misled buyers about safety while marketing to Black women and children.
The Attorney General’s office says the state is not asking the court to decide broad science debates. Instead, it wants a ruling on whether L’Oréal’s claims and omissions were deceptive under state law. The complaint points to phrases like “healthy gloss,” “healthy hair,” “defy breakage,” and “stronger smoother hair” as messages that implied safety or health benefits. The state seeks civil penalties, restitution, and an injunction that would bar sales without adequate warnings.
The Science Minnesota Cites and What It Can Prove
The complaint cites epidemiological studies that report higher risks of uterine and ovarian cancer among women who used chemical relaxers multiple times per year. A 2022 National Institutes of Health-linked study of more than thirty thousand women reported about twice the uterine cancer risk for frequent users compared with nonusers, though the absolute risk remained in the low single digits. Epidemiology can show associations in populations, but it does not prove a specific product caused a specific person’s cancer.
The available materials do not include brand-by-brand ingredient histories or batch testing across decades. They also do not list a case number or a docket with detailed internal company records in public view. Those gaps are common early in litigation and may be addressed during discovery. The court has not ruled on liability, expert testimony, or whether the marketing was deceptive. The case is in an early stage and will likely move through motions next.
L’Oréal’s Response and the Fight Over Risk and Responsibility
L’Oréal says consumer health is its top priority and that its scientists rigorously evaluate safety. The company says it follows all regulations in every market where it sells products. It also says it is confident in the safety of SoftSheen-Carson’s products and argues that the cited research shows an association, not a causal link, and calls for more study. L’Oréal also highlights its supplier controls and ingredient testing for safety and quality.
This clash taps into a deeper frustration shared by many Americans. People on the left and the right see a pattern: big companies profit while consumers carry hidden risks, and regulators act too slowly. Black women and girls were a core market for relaxers, which ties the case to culture and fairness. Whether the court finds deception or not, the lawsuit asks a basic question: when science raises red flags, do marketers have to warn or tone down their claims?
Sources:
twitchy.com, ag.state.mn.us, valleynewslive.com, dicellolevitt.com
