Johnson & Johnson Ordered to Pay $1.5 Billion in Talc Cancer Case
For Johnson & Johnson, the courtroom loss in Baltimore was historic and devastating. A jury has ordered the company and its related businesses to pay more than $1.5 billion to a woman who says years of using its baby powder exposed her to asbestos and caused a rare, aggressive cancer.
For the woman at the centre of the case, Cherie Craft, the verdict was about accountability after a diagnosis that changed her life forever.
Craft was diagnosed last year with peritoneal mesothelioma, a rare cancer that forms in the lining of the abdomen and is most often linked to asbestos exposure. Her lawyers told jurors that she used Johnson’s Baby Powder almost daily for decades, trusting it because it was marketed as safe enough for babies.
The jury agreed and delivered one of the largest verdicts ever against the company in a single case.
How the Jury Reached Its Decision
After hearing weeks of testimony, jurors concluded that Johnson & Johnson, along with two of its subsidiaries and its consumer health spinoff, failed to warn Craft that the talc in its baby powder could contain asbestos.
They awarded her nearly $60 million in compensatory damages, meant to cover medical costs, suffering, and the toll the illness has taken on her life. But the most striking part of the verdict came next.
Jurors imposed $1 billion in punitive damages against Johnson & Johnson and $500 million against Pecos River Talc, a company linked to J&J’s talc supply. Punitive damages are meant to punish behaviour a jury sees as especially harmful and to send a message beyond one case.
Craft’s attorneys said the verdict reflects jurors’ belief that the company put profits ahead of safety.
“Cherie spent her life helping other people,” one of her lawyers said. “Her cancer didn’t have to happen.”
Johnson & Johnson’s Strong Response
Johnson & Johnson responded swiftly and forcefully. The company said it will appeal the verdict and described the ruling as deeply flawed.
In a statement, the company called the decision “egregious” and “patently unconstitutional,” arguing that the trial court made serious errors and that the verdict conflicts with many other cases where juries sided with the company.
J&J continues to insist that its talc products are safe and asbestos-free. Company officials say decades of testing and scientific studies back that claim and argue that the lawsuits rely on unreliable science.
“These cases ignore the overwhelming evidence,” a company spokesperson said, adding that J&J believes the verdict will not stand on appeal.
A Much Bigger Legal Fight
This case is not an isolated one. Johnson & Johnson is facing more than 67,000 lawsuits from people who say they developed cancer after using talc-based products. Some cases involve ovarian cancer, while others, like Craft’s, involve mesothelioma.
The outcomes have been mixed. J&J has won some trials, but other juries have awarded significant damages to plaintiffs. Earlier this month, a California jury ordered the company to pay $40 million to two women who said its baby powder caused their ovarian cancer.
Over the years, Johnson & Johnson has tried to settle the litigation by placing a subsidiary into bankruptcy and creating a compensation fund for claimants. Courts have repeatedly rejected those efforts, ruling that the company could not use bankruptcy as a shield while remaining financially healthy.
What Peritoneal Mesothelioma Means
Peritoneal mesothelioma is rare and aggressive. It often appears decades after asbestos exposure, making it difficult for patients to connect their illness to a specific cause.
There is no cure. Treatment focuses on managing symptoms and slowing progression through surgery, chemotherapy, and supportive care. Even with treatment, the disease is life-altering.
Craft’s lawyers told jurors that what made her case especially painful was that her exposure came from a product many families kept in their homes without question.
Why Talc Became So Controversial
Talc itself is not asbestos, but the two minerals can form near each other in the ground. Critics argue that without strict controls, talc can become contaminated during mining.
Johnson & Johnson has long said it tested its talc and found no asbestos. Plaintiffs argue that internal documents and outside testing show otherwise.
Amid growing lawsuits and public concern, Johnson & Johnson stopped selling talc-based baby powder in the US in 2020. In 2023, it ended global sales and switched entirely to cornstarch-based products.
The company says the move was driven by declining demand and misinformation. Plaintiffs see it as an acknowledgement of risk.
What Happens Now
The appeals process could take years. Higher courts may reduce the damages, order a new trial, or overturn the verdict altogether. Large punitive awards are often cut down on appeal, though the underlying finding of liability can still stand.
Even so, legal experts say the size of the verdict sends a clear signal. Each large award increases pressure on the company and shapes how future juries view similar cases.
For Johnson & Johnson, the ruling adds to a long-running legal battle that shows no sign of ending soon.
For Craft, the verdict offers something different: recognition, accountability, and a sense that her story was heard.
