State AG Multistate Coordination
State attorneys general have been among the most aggressive PFAS enforcers, filing lawsuits against PFAS manufacturers for contaminating state waters, harming residents, and violating consumer protection laws. Multistate coalitions — coordinated by the National Association of Attorneys General — have achieved economies of scale in litigation and increased leverage in settlement negotiations.
Attorney general PFAS actions typically allege violations of state environmental laws (requiring cleanup of contaminated sites), consumer protection laws (fraudulent concealment of known health risks), and state water pollution statutes. The combination of legal theories provides multiple avenues for relief and maximizes settlement value.
Major State AG Settlements and Litigation
Several states negotiated portions of the 3M and DuPont/Chemours settlements that provided state-specific funds earmarked for water treatment infrastructure, environmental remediation, and health monitoring programs. State-specific allocation from these settlements reflects the geographic distribution of water system plaintiffs and the relative severity of state-level contamination.
States that opted out of global settlements to pursue state-specific claims — or that filed separate actions for natural resource damages and state costs not covered by water utility settlements — have pursued additional recovery. Natural resource damage claims for PFAS contamination of state-owned waters, fish populations, and wildlife are being actively litigated.
Future AG Enforcement Priorities
State attorneys general are developing PFAS enforcement priorities for the post-MCL era, focusing on: enforcing the new federal drinking water standards against non-compliant utilities; pursuing PFAS manufacturers and users for site-specific contamination through CERCLA cost recovery; and challenging inadequate federal PFAS regulatory actions through administrative litigation.
Environmental justice considerations are increasingly central to state AG PFAS enforcement priorities. Directing remediation resources and settlement funds to disproportionately affected communities of color and low-income populations reflects both legal obligations under environmental justice executive orders and political accountability to constituents who bear the greatest PFAS health burden.