The Legal Examiner Affiliate Network The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner search instagram avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner
Skip to main content

Countries are continuously becoming more interdependent through economic integration. New and advanced methods of supply chain management have led to production being strewn across several countries to take advantage of global specialization. There are clearly benefits to this paradigm shift, however cost cannot be overlooked. Labor and quality regulations are not consistent among all the countries in the world; because of this, proper inspection of imports must be conducted to ensure that potentially dangerous products do not enter this country. Multiple litigation seeking homeowner redress for dangerous and defective Chinese drywall, which has made its way into thousands of U.S. homes, underscores the need for better import oversight.

A recent article reports that there are numerous lawsuits concerning defective Chinese drywall that was used to build thousands of homes across America. At the federal level, these suits have been consolidated into multi-district litigation, pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The drywall in question, allegedly, emits "corrosive gases that emit foul odors, damage electrical equipment and copper throughout the homes and allegedly cause a host of health problems." Explanations for the cause of these problems vary from "high amounts of sulfur" to the "inclusion of radioactive material" (banned by the EPA) in the drywall. Even more troubling is that residents who live in houses built with the suspect drywall are advised to not remove the drywall due to the risk of cross contamination and risk of allowing the defective drywall’s dangerous materials to escape and linger in our atmosphere.

This situation demonstrates the need of proper safety standards when dealing with imports. It also underscores the importance of litigation as a tool to assure present and future safety. As stated before, it is known that other nations may have inferior quality and safety standards vis-a-vis the U.S. when it comes to manufacturing goods. This fact alone should be impetus enough to assure proper regulation enforcement when dealing with imports. However, as is often the case, it seems that only litigation will send the message that international standards need to change; a strong message that importation of construction materials must not pose a health risk to thousands of American citizens, and, if it does, punishment will be swift, severe, and expensive.

Hopefully these lawsuits have put this issue "on the map" and will serve as a wake-call to improving import regulation and imported product safety for our citizens. The tide of globalization is rising; not reacting to this trend with appropriate regulation and vigilance would be a costly mistake.

Lawsuit Financial supports sensible legislation that would first prevent, then punish, foreign product manufacturers from poisoning our environment and our citiizens. Court access to consumers and courtroon accountability of the perpetrators (perhaps payment into a victims fund for the right to do business here?) should be key elements of such legislation. State and federal legislators: What is more important than the safety of our citizens?

Comments for this article are closed.