A U.S. court case has raised fresh questions over how children’s oral care products are marketed, with Colgate-Palmolive facing lawsuits that accuse it of misleading parents about the safety of its children’s mouthwash range.

The proposed class actions claim that brightly packaged products such as fruit-flavored “kids” rinses may create the impression that they are safe for very young children, including those under six. Parents argue that the branding downplays important safety distinctions, even though health authorities in the United States advise that children under six should generally avoid fluoride mouth rinses due to the risk of swallowing.

Medical guidance also recommends that children aged two to six use only small, supervised amounts of fluoride toothpaste—typically a pea-sized portion—to limit fluoride ingestion.

The lawsuits allege that Colgate’s marketing presentation could lead consumers to treat mouthwash in the same way as toothpaste, despite different usage risks. Fluoride, while beneficial for preventing tooth decay when used correctly, can be harmful if ingested in large amounts, particularly in young children.

A federal judge in Chicago allowed the mouthwash-related claims to move forward, stating that consumers could reasonably be confused by packaging that prominently features “kids” or “children’s” labeling. The court also questioned the company’s argument that fine-print FDA warnings on the back of packaging are sufficient to prevent misunderstanding, noting that front-label branding plays a stronger role in consumer decisions.

However, the court previously dismissed a similar complaint involving Colgate toothpaste, pointing out that toothpaste packaging clearly instructs parents on limited amounts for young children, which reduces ambiguity.

The plaintiffs argue the case reflects a broader issue in the industry, where marketing language and visual design may blur important safety boundaries for children’s health products. Other companies, including Procter & Gamble, Perrigo, and Sanofi, have also faced similar legal scrutiny over fluoride-based children’s oral care products.

Colgate has previously agreed to update packaging across several of its oral care brands following regulatory concerns raised in Texas, where officials questioned how children’s dental products were being marketed to consumers.