BlogLine

PFAS regulatory scrutiny expands to consumer apparel: What the Texas AG’s Lululemon inquiry signals

4/28/26

By: Margo Wright

Co-Authors: Joshua Ferguson, Kevin Kenneally, Charlotte Meltzer and Kevin Ringel

As headlines regarding PFAS (or so-called “forever chemicals”) around the country have accelerated, on April 13, 2026, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that his office has opened an investigation into Lululemon over the possibility of PFAS being present in their athletic gear.

The scope of the Attorney General’s investigation, as stated, is to: (1) examine whether athletic apparel from Lululemon “contains PFAS or ‘forever chemicals’ that their health-conscious customers would not expect based on the brand’s marketing[,]” and (2) “review the company’s Restricted Substances List, testing protocols, and supply chain practices to determine whether Lululemon’s products comply with its stated safety standards.”  Paxton framed the matter as a consumer protection issue, warning that companies will be held accountable if they sell potentially harmful materials under the guise of wellness or sustainability.

The press release did not identify a specific law which may have been violated or the impetus for an investigation into Lululemon. However, the Texas Attorney General’s press release may signal a general attitude shift regarding the presence of potentially “toxic” substances in consumer products.

Lululemon responded to the press release by stating that it does not use PFAS in its products currently. Lululemon highlighted that its Restricted Substance List, which outlines its standards for chemicals in products, is regularly monitored and updated annually to “incorporate changes in manufacturing chemistry, government regulations, industry best practices, and scientific knowledge.” Finally, Lululemon stated that it requires all vendors to regularly conduct testing for restricted substances by credible third-party agencies, “to help prevent the unintentional reintroduction of PFAS into our products.”

For businesses and claims professionals, the investigation is less about leggings and more about trajectory.  Even in states that have historically taken a business-friendly approach to regulation, this action suggests increasing skepticism toward safety claims tied to consumer products. Whether or not enforcement follows the Texas announcement, this is another reminder that preparedness is key in the face of wider regulatory attention.

Fore more information, please contact Margo Wright  (Margo.Wright@fmglaw.com), Joshua Ferguson (jferguson@fmglaw.com), Kevin Kenneally (Kevin.Kenneally@fmglaw.com), Charlotte Meltzer (Charlotte.Meltzer@fmglaw.com) or Kevin Ringel (Kevin.Ringel@fmglaw.com).

Information conveyed herein should not be construed as legal advice or represent any specific or binding policy or procedure of any organization. Information provided is for educational purposes only. These materials are written in a general format and not intended to be advice applicable to any specific circumstance. Legal opinions may vary when based on subtle factual distinctions. All rights reserved. No part of this presentation may be reproduced, published or posted without the written permission of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP.