The Supreme Court has rejected Johnson & Johnson's
With the Court's decision, the $2 billion award will remain in place. The justices declined to comment on the reason or reasons behind their ruling.
J&J, for their part, said they had been treated unfairly by the legal system. In the company's appeal, it wrote that a trial between it and 22 women from 12 different states wouldn't be fair. 5 of the 22 filing women are or were Missouri residents prior to their deaths.
Initially, a jury in Missouri awarded the 22 plaintiffs $4.7 billion for their alleged injuries. A state appeals court, however, removed two plaintiffs from the suit due to their location. The court also reduced the award to the $2.1 billion where it now sits.
The initial jury, the appeals court, and now the Supreme Court have found that J&J's talc-based products had indeed caused the plaintiff's cancer. They also ruled that J&J had knowingly sold this potentially dangerous product.
"We find there was significant reprehensibility in defendants' conduct," the state appeals court ruling stated. "The harm suffered by plaintiffs was physical, not just economic."
Johnson & Johnson has long stood as the top seller of baby powders. Now, its baby powder has been taken off shelves in the U.S. and Canada due to the alleged carcinogens carried within it. However, other countries continue to allow the sale of the product.
Removing the product from the shelves is far from the last step. The company is now facing thousands of lawsuits from women who claim that their cancer was caused by asbestos contamination in J&J's talc products.
The possibility of talc-asbestos contamination been recognized in the cosmetics industry for decades. In 1976, the industry agreed to reduce the amount of asbestos in its products down to undetectable levels across the board.
Due to their similar structure, talc and asbestos are often found in the same mines, making it relatively easy for asbestos to make its way into freshly mined talc.
J&J has consistently denied the presence of asbestos contamination in its products. It continues to argue that its products are safe for use and that there is no link between talc and ovarian cancer.
"We deeply sympathize with anyone suffering from cancer, which is why the facts are so important," company spokeswoman Kim Montagnino wrote in a statement. "We remain confident that our talc is safe, asbestos free, and does not cause cancer."
Before the company had removed its baby powder from the shelves, demand for the product had already begun to dwindle as consumers learned about the thousands of women claiming it gave them cancer. The company called this "misinformation".
Neither Justice Samuel Alito nor Brett Kavanaugh took part in the Supreme Court's decision. Alito reportedly owns between $15,000 and $50,000 in J&J stock.
Kavanaugh's apparent conflict, on the other hand, came from his father who was once the head of a lobbying group working to keep talc from being labeled a carcinogen. Some ethicists disagreed with Kavanaugh's view that this relationship constituted a conflict.
