Prop 65/Environmental Blog

In 1986, the California electorate overwhelmingly passed Proposition 65, formally known as “The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986.”  In enacting Proposition 65, the electorate explicitly found that California state agencies had failed to protect Californians from hazardous chemicals that pose a serious potential threat to their health and well-being...
Read more about Proposition 65

recent posts - prop 65/environment

posted on May 21, 2013
In a study released this month by the University of California, Berkeley’s School of Public Health, 32 lip products used by young Asian women in Oakland, California were tested in order to assess the potential health risks associated with ingesting, or swallowing, small amounts of the products.  The study found that the tested products contained titanium and aluminum, along with lead, manganese, cadmium, and chromium, which could then be ingested by the product user.  The... full text
posted on May 20, 2013
Peter Englander, Whitney Leeman, and Laurence Vinocur--three clients of The Chanler Group--served ten 60-Day Notices of Proposition 65 Violation last Friday, May 17.  The notices were served to companies offering products such as furniture and hand tools for sale in California containing chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm, without the required health hazard warning.  TCG's citizen enforcers allege that the companies' products contain the phthalate DEHP, the... full text
posted on May 17, 2013
  A San Francisco Superior Court judge recently ruled that dietary supplements are “food,” which may exempt the manufacturers from having to provide health hazard warnings for their products that contain chemicals known to cause cancer and reproductive harm under Proposition 65. In 2008, citizen enforcer Stephen Gillett brought a case against supplement manufacturers Garden of Life Inc., Metagenics Inc., and Nature’s Bounty Inc. alleging that their products exposed... full text
posted on May 16, 2013
California Attorney General Kamala Harris recently filed a lawsuit against Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s, Target, and other food retailers, alleging that they were selling lead-tainted ginger and plum candies and other food products without the health hazard warning required by California law, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. Under Proposition 65, companies selling products containing chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and/or reproductive harm must first provide a... full text
posted on May 10, 2013
Cliff Chanler, the founder of The Chanler Group, was featured in Bay Area TV station KTVU’s news report about a possible overhaul of Proposition 65.  Proposition 65, or The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, requires businesses that offer products for sale in California to provide health hazard warnings if the products contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm.  California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, the lead... full text
posted on May 9, 2013
A recent study by the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine shows that children who were exposed to flame retardant compounds in the air and dust before they were born may suffer from behavior and cognition difficulties during early childhood and onward, Scientific American reported. Researchers collected blood samples from 309 pregnant women early in their second trimester and tracked the children through the first five years of their lives.  They found a correlation between spikes... full text
posted on May 7, 2013
The Chanler Group, the nation’s leading law firm that represents citizens acting in the public interest to enforce Proposition 65, announced today that it supports the reforms proposed by Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. to strengthen and restore the intent of Proposition 65 to protect Californians from exposures to harmful chemicals found in consumer products.  The Chanler Group agrees there is a need to deter frivolous lawsuits, and to improve how the public is warned about dangerous... full text
posted on May 6, 2013
On April 23, 2013, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge David I. Brown granted California Attorney General (AG) Kamala Harris’s motion for judgment on the pleadings against the complaint of Plaintiffs Anthony Held, Russell Brimer, and John Moore, clients of The Chanler Group, and dismissing the case.  Plaintiffs challenged the legality of the AG’s regulation, Section 3003 of Title 11 of the California Code of Regulations, requiring citizen enforcers such as plaintiffs to... full text
posted on May 3, 2013
This week, the California State Assembly’s Committee on the Judiciary voted 10-0 to pass a dramatically revamped version of the proposed legislative amendment to Proposition 65, known as Assembly Bill (“AB”) 227.  The bill was originally written to provide anyone receiving a 60-Day Notice of Violation of Proposition 65 with fourteen days to correct the violation and provide a sworn statement that the violation has been corrected.  A correction within 14 days and... full text
posted on May 3, 2013
Peter Englander, Whitney Leeman, John Moore, and Laurence Vinocur--clients of The Chanler Group--on May 1 served nine 60-Day Notices of Violation of Proposition 65 on companies offering furniture and other products for sale in California that contain chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive harm, without the required health hazard warning.  TCG's citizen enforcers allege that the companies' products contain the phthalate DEHP, the flame retardant chemical TDCPP, and the... full text