Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson and its consumer health spinoff Kenvue, alleging that the companies engaged in deceptive marketing practices by promoting Tylenol as safe for use during pregnancy while concealing potential risks tied to autism and attention-deficit disorders in children. The lawsuit, filed in Panola County, Texas, has brought renewed attention to a growing national debate over the safety of acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, and its possible connection to neurodevelopmental conditions.
The state’s complaint asserts that Johnson & Johnson and Kenvue violated Texas consumer protection and fraud statutes by advertising Tylenol as the preferred and trusted pain reliever for pregnant women without providing adequate warnings about potential long-term effects on fetal brain development. According to the lawsuit, internal research and scientific literature allegedly available to the companies suggested a link between prenatal exposure to acetaminophen and a higher likelihood of autism spectrum disorder or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children. The filing contends that the companies continued marketing Tylenol to pregnant mothers as entirely safe, despite the unresolved scientific debate.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office argues that the companies prioritized profits and brand reputation over consumer safety. The lawsuit also accuses Johnson & Johnson of transferring liabilities associated with Tylenol to Kenvue during the corporate spin-off of its consumer health division, a move that Texas contends was designed to insulate Johnson & Johnson from future litigation. Paxton’s office is seeking civil penalties, financial restitution, and injunctions prohibiting future marketing that presents the medication as completely risk-free for pregnant users.
The case represents one of the most significant state-led legal actions to date against the makers of over-the-counter acetaminophen. It follows a wave of private lawsuits filed across the United States in recent years, many of which were consolidated in multidistrict litigation before being dismissed earlier in 2025 after a federal judge ruled that the plaintiffs’ expert testimony failed to meet admissibility standards. Unlike those cases, the Texas lawsuit is brought under state consumer laws rather than product liability theories, potentially giving prosecutors broader authority to challenge alleged corporate misconduct.
Kenvue, which became an independent company in 2023, issued a public response rejecting the allegations and affirming that Tylenol remains one of the most studied and trusted over-the-counter medications in the world. The company stated that acetaminophen is considered by the medical community and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be the safest pain and fever reducer available to pregnant women when used as directed. Johnson & Johnson, which no longer manufactures or markets Tylenol, referred inquiries to Kenvue, emphasizing that all consumer health operations and liabilities now fall under the new entity’s control.
Scientific research into the potential link between acetaminophen and neurodevelopmental disorders remains ongoing. Several observational studies have reported possible associations between frequent use of acetaminophen during pregnancy and increased risks of autism or ADHD in children. However, medical experts have cautioned that these studies show correlation rather than causation, and confounding factors such as genetics, maternal health conditions, and environmental influences may contribute to the observed patterns. The FDA has acknowledged the need for continued research but has stopped short of requiring label warnings, noting that a clear causal relationship has not been established.
The Texas lawsuit arrives at a politically charged moment, as national debates over public health, pharmaceutical accountability, and reproductive safety continue to intensify. The case has also drawn attention because of its alignment with statements made by political figures, including former President Donald Trump and vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who have both echoed claims linking Tylenol use during pregnancy to autism. Public health organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have reiterated that acetaminophen remains appropriate for use during pregnancy when necessary to treat pain or fever, stressing that untreated high fever can also endanger fetal development.
If successful, the lawsuit could have major implications for the pharmaceutical industry and consumer health marketing practices. It challenges the boundaries of corporate accountability in product safety communication and raises broader questions about how scientific uncertainty should be addressed in consumer advertising. The case also tests how far a state attorney general can go in framing disputed medical research as a deceptive trade practice under state law.
As the litigation moves forward in the Texas courts, Johnson & Johnson and Kenvue are expected to mount a vigorous defense, arguing that the claims are not supported by reliable scientific evidence. For now, the lawsuit underscores both the enduring influence of Tylenol in American medicine and the growing scrutiny of corporate transparency in the health products industry.