ARTICLE
1 September 2025

Illinois Expands Jurisdiction And Regulation Of PFAS

SH
Shook, Hardy & Bacon

Contributor

Shook, Hardy & Bacon has long been recognized as one of the premier litigation firms in the country. For more than a century, the firm has defended companies in their most substantial national and international products liability, mass tort and complex litigation matters.

The firm has leveraged its complex product liability litigation expertise to expand into several other practice areas and advance its mission of “being the best in the world at providing creative and practical solutions at unsurpassed value.” As a result, the firm has built nationally recognized practices in areas such as intellectual property, environmental and toxic tort, employment litigation, commercial litigation, government enforcement and compliance, and public policy.

On August 15, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker signed nearly 270 bills into law, including legislation expanding jurisdiction for claims of exposure to "toxic" substances, as well as two new laws regulating the use of PFAS.
United States Illinois Environment

On August 15, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker signed nearly 270 bills into law, including legislation expanding jurisdiction for claims of exposure to "toxic" substances, as well as two new laws regulating the use of PFAS.

Expanded Jurisdiction in Toxic Tort Litigation

In a significant win for the plaintiff trial bar, Senate Bill 328 significantly expands the jurisdiction of Illinois courts in cases alleging chemical exposure, inviting out-of-state plaintiffs to avail themselves of Illinois state courts. So long as at least one defendant company is headquartered or formed "at home" in Illinois, such suits may now proceed against any business registered to do business in the state, even if the plaintiff resides out of state, the alleged exposure occurred outside Illinois, and the defendant company is not "at home" in the state. The law specifically applies to claims of exposure to "toxic" substances, defined broadly as "any substance (other than a radioactive substance) which has the capacity to produce bodily injury or illness to man through ingestion, inhalation, or absorption through any body surface."

The requirement that at least one defendant be "at home" in Illinois is unlikely to limit the influx of out-of-state litigants, given that toxic tort cases often involve multiple defendants and that an in-state defendant is often joined to defeat federal diversity jurisdiction.

The law, which is effective immediately, follows a U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding a similar Pennsylvania statute. Companies registered to do business in Illinois should evaluate their registration to determine whether continued registration is necessary to their business.

Expanded Regulation of Products Containing PFAS

The recently signed House Bill 2409 and House Bill 2516 expand the Illinois PFAS Reduction Act, which already regulates Class B firefighting foam containing intentionally added PFAS.

House Bill 2409 targets the use of PFAS in firefighting personal protective clothing. Beginning January 1, 2026, sellers of such clothing in Illinois must provide purchasers with written notice disclosing the presence and purpose of PFAS in firefighting clothing. Effective January 1, 2027, the law prohibits the manufacture, sale, and distribution of firefighting clothing containing intentionally added PFAS. This restriction further expands on January 1, 2030, to include auxiliary firefighting personal protective equipment, such as "self-contained breathing apparatuses and other respiratory protection products, hearing protection, protective communication devices, and fall protection products."

House Bill 2516 bans the sale and distribution of certain consumer products containing intentionally added PFAS, as of January 1, 2032. Affected products specifically include cosmetics, juvenile products, dental floss, menstrual products, and intimate apparel. The amendment defines "intentionally added PFAS" as those "deliberately added" during manufacturing when "the continued presence of the PFAS is desired . . . to perform a specific function in the final product." Civil penalties apply to any person who knowingly violates the ban, and to manufacturers regardless of knowledge. Penalties are set at up to $5,000 for an initial violation and up to $10,000 for subsequent violations.

Read more in the full issue of Material Concerns: Legal Updates on Substances of Emerging Concern >>

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More