117
No, of course not. They know it should be $40 Billion. That could never be permitted.
40 Billion isn't enough either, they've literally poisoned the entire planet and every human on it with PFAS.
Okie dokie, $40 Trillion it is.
Sadly, never an option.
Never say never.
You know who also poisoned the planet? The plants. Yup. That oxygen shit made the planet flammable. Asshole plants.
(Just joking; but yeah, fucking forever chemicals)
The thing is 0² is quite reactive and the bonds are usually pretty easy to break. Compare that to fluorine-carbon bonds and you'll see why this is an issue.
Well, oxygen is going nowhere too. So, yeah, I see why it is an issue.
Hell yeah, about time for a wave of similar lawsuits to force a crackdown on forever chemicals.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to review a $40 million verdict against E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co, preserving a legal win for an Ohio man who said toxic "forever chemicals" released by the company into drinking water caused his cancer.
For the Lemmy Brain jumping to conclusions.
Obviously DuPont competitors own the court and want a consistent legal framework where their own chemical use isn’t investigated too closely.
/s
"Supreme Court bought by Dupont, will not review their masters bad doing"
Fix that for you Reuters.
Dupont was appealing to get it reduced, though. If the Supreme Court was on their side, they would have taken the appeal.
Whenever the Supreme Court won't take a case, it's important to see why. It always defers to a lower court's ruling. And a lot of the time it's the opposite of what you may think, which is good in the end.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to review a $40 million verdict against E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co, preserving a legal win for an Ohio man who said toxic "forever chemicals" released by the company into drinking water caused his cancer.
[...]
The 6th Circuit upheld the lower court’s decision, finding it was right to conclude that DuPont’s behavior impacted the plaintiffs in virtually identical ways, so it was appropriate to bar the company from relitigating arguments it had repeatedly lost before.
In this case, refusing to review the case protected the win for the plaintiff and shut down DuPont's attempt to avoid paying.
Of course, Thomas and Kavanaugh did some brown-nosing for their corporate overlords:
Dissenting from the high court's decision not to grant review, Justice Clarence Thomas said Monday the bellwether trials were not meant to be representative of all the cases in the multidistrict litigation, and DuPont should not have been barred from contesting elements of negligence found in those earlier cases.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he would have heard the case.
Kavanaugh was probably getting boofed by DuPont, hopefully with some pfas.
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
117 points (100.0% liked)
News
23301 readers
1007 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS