The Washington Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Amazon.com Inc can be sued by families of individuals who died by suicide after ingesting sodium nitrite purchased through third-party sellers on the company’s platform, overturning a lower court decision that had dismissed the claims.
This landmark decision means that wrongful death and product liability claims brought by multiple families can move forward to trial, where juries will decide whether Amazon’s conduct — including the way the chemical was marketed and sold — breached a duty of care.
Background: Legal Battles Over Sodium Nitrite Sales
Sodium nitrite is a chemical legally used in food preservation, research and industry, but at high concentrations it is lethal if ingested. Families allege that Amazon sold high-purity sodium nitrite products and that its platform facilitated purchases by vulnerable individuals, including minors, who used the substance to end their lives.
These cases stem from deaths that occurred in 2020 and 2021, involving decedents between the ages of 17 and 27 who bought sodium nitrite from Amazon. Plaintiffs have pursued unspecified damages under Washington state product liability laws, arguing that the product’s availability and Amazon’s sales practices contributed to foreseeable harm.
Previously, smaller courts had sided with Amazon, holding that intentional acts like suicide broke the causal chain and that the company did not have a legal duty to prevent misuse of products sold by third-party vendors. Those rulings are now overturned by the state’s highest court.
Supreme Court’s Ruling and Legal Reasoning
Writing for the court, Justices stressed that whether Amazon breached a duty of care and whether the suicides were a foreseeable result of its actions are questions for a jury, not a judge at the motion-to-dismiss stage. The unanimous decision rejected the idea that suicide automatically severs liability under product liability law.
The ruling reinstates claims that had been dismissed and sets the stage for potentially high-stakes litigation that could expand expectations of corporate responsibility for online marketplaces.
Amazon’s Response and Policy Changes
Amazon has stated its disagreement with the ruling, emphasizing its commitment to customer safety while maintaining that high-purity sodium nitrite is not intended for direct consumption and can be misused. The company said it already banned the sale of sodium nitrite above certain purity levels on its platform to mitigate potential harms.
The platform has also faced regulatory measures in Washington state, where “Tyler’s Law” restricts the sale of sodium nitrite at concentrations higher than 10 % to verified business customers and mandates tougher labeling requirements.
Broader Implications for E-Commerce Liability
Legal experts say this ruling could have far-reaching implications for how online marketplaces are held accountable for the products sold by third-party vendors. The question of duty — especially when an e-commerce platform’s algorithms influence what customers see and buy — is central to emerging litigation.
Advocates for the families argue that Amazon had knowledge of the risks associated with sodium nitrite long before litigation reached the state’s high court, including warnings from family members and public reports linking the chemical to suicide.
Conversely, e-commerce industry representatives caution that imposing broad liability on online marketplaces for third-party sales could dampen innovation and create compliance burdens without clear legal boundaries.
What’s Next
With the Washington Supreme Court green-lighting these lawsuits, the cases are now poised to enter trial phases, where juries will evaluate evidence about Amazon’s role in selling a product that was later misused in suicides. This development will be closely watched by legal observers, industry stakeholders and policymakers as it could signal changing standards for platform accountability in the digital economy.
More about Amazon:
Staff Report
Staff Report
Staff Report
