As reported in our September 30, 2024, blog item, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in September 2024 that the plaintiffs established by a preponderance of the evidence that the levels of fluoride typical in drinking water in the United States pose an unreasonable risk of injury to the health of the public. Food & Water Watch v. EPA (No. 3:17-cv-02162-EMC). On January 17, 2025, the Biden U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) filed a notice of appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Food & Water Watch v. EPA (No. 25-384). Now that President Trump’s nominee for EPA Administrator, Lee Zeldin, has been confirmed, it remains to be seen how the Trump EPA will proceed. A mediation conference is scheduled for February 26, 2025.
In its September 24, 2024, decision, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California found that “fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (‘mg/L’) — the level presently considered ‘optimal’ in the United States — poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children.” The court notes that its finding “does not conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health; rather, as required by the Amended TSCA, the Court finds there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response.” The court order does not dictate how EPA must respond, but states that “[o]ne thing the EPA cannot do, however, in the face of this Court’s finding, is to ignore that risk.”
[View source.]
