Reading about a toothpaste-related class-action lawsuit is somewhat unsettling. It’s one of those products that most people automatically reach for—a tube by the sink that they use twice a day without giving it much thought. Colgate is as commonplace as the alarm clock in millions of American homes. This is precisely the reason why the mounting legal pressure on Colgate-Palmolive seems so odd and deserving of attention.
The company’s legal issues are not isolated incidents. They have been piling up in various courtrooms, involving various products, various claims, and various plaintiff groups. Some are concerned about misleading advertising. Heavy metals are involved in some. Some focus on children’s fluoride safety. A recognizable name on the tube is what unites them all.
Tom’s of Maine, a Colgate subsidiary, was the most recent active case to be resolved. Allegations that the company used dishonest and misleading business practices in the production and promotion of specific toothpaste products produced at its Sanford, Maine facility led to a $2.9 million settlement. On July 6, 2026, the claim window closed. There was a limited window for consumers who bought qualifying Tom’s products between late 2020 and early 2026 to file claims, and many probably missed it completely.
Tom’s and Colgate denied any misconduct. In these circumstances, that is the norm. Whether or not it’s an admission of anything, accepting a multimillion-dollar settlement to avoid the expenses and dangers of ongoing litigation is a signal in and of itself.
A different, and perhaps more concerning, case is still pending in New York federal court. The lawsuit, Brower v. Colgate-Palmolive, was filed in April 2025 by the legal firm Hagens Berman. It claims that some Colgate toothpaste products, including those designed and sold for children, have high concentrations of heavy metals like lead, arsenic, mercury, and cadmium. According to an independent consumer goods study, products like Colgate Watermelon Burst Toothpaste, which is specifically targeted at children, and Colgate Total Whitening Toothpaste had lead levels of 200 parts per billion or more.
The issue is not hypothetical. The link between heavy metal exposure and major health consequences, such as liver and kidney damage, neurological damage, reproductive disorders, and an increased risk of cancer, has long been documented by the World Health Organization. Compared to adults, children are more susceptible to these effects. The claim that these substances may be present in toothpaste sold to parents with the implicit assurance of safety is not insignificant. A parent’s thoughts about this type of claim often persist long after the lawsuit is resolved or dropped.
More recently, in July 2026, three new class-action lawsuits were filed in a federal court in California against Colgate-Palmolive, Procter & Gamble, and Haleon regarding an entirely different matter. According to these lawsuits, Colgate Total, Crest, Sensodyne, and Parodontax toothpastes contain sodium lauryl sulfate, a chemical that the plaintiffs characterize as a harsh detergent and known gum irritant, while falsely marketing themselves as preventing gingivitis and promoting gum health. After using a product she thought was meant to protect her teeth and gums on a regular basis, one plaintiff complained of pain and sensitivity in those areas.
The question of the mouth rinse comes next. In March 2026, a federal judge ruled that Colgate must deal with two lawsuits alleging that its children’s fluoride rinse packaging deceives parents into thinking the products are safe for children under six, an age group for which fluoride rinses are expressly discouraged by health authorities. The judge determined that the packaging, which included vivid colors and flavors like Silly Strawberry and Bubble Fruit, might be deceptive because reasonable consumers might not be aware to look for FDA warnings in the fine print on the back label.
One of the biggest consumer goods companies in the world might not suffer a fatal blow from any one of these lawsuits. Given the size of Colgate-Palmolive, there will inevitably be legal issues. However, when these cases—heavy metals, false labeling, false health claims, fluoride safety—are taken as a whole, it seems as though something more systematic is being questioned. It’s not just about a product’s safety; it’s also about whether or not consumers have been fully informed about what they put in their mouths on a daily basis.
Resolving that issue is more difficult than any class-action lawsuit.
