Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody is throwing her support behind a legislative effort that would provide substantial legal immunity to manufacturers of engineered stone countertops, even as evidence mounts regarding a deadly health crisis among the workers who process the materials. The proposed legislation seeks to legally define these products as safe, a move that critics argue ignores the fatal reality of silicosis—an incurable lung disease caused by the inhalation of crystalline silica dust.
The bill supported by Moody, which mirrors a companion version in the Florida House, explicitly asserts that the countertop materials currently at the center of national bans and numerous lawsuits are “not inherently dangerous.” The language of the bill further declares that these stone products “do not pose an inherent risk of injury to human beings.” By establishing this legal framework, the state would make it significantly more difficult for laborers to sue manufacturers for product liability when they fall ill.
Understanding the controversy requires a look at how these countertops are engineered. Unlike natural stone slabs like granite or marble, engineered versions are man-made composites. They are typically composed of at least 90 percent crystalline silica, which is mined and pulverized before being bonded together with resins, dyes, and various metals. This mixture is poured into molds, dried, and baked into the large slabs found in high-end kitchens and bathrooms.
While major manufacturers like Cambria perform some fabrication in-house, the industry standard involves shipping these massive slabs to independent fabrication shops. In these facilities, workers are tasked with shaping, polishing, and grinding the stone to meet specific customer orders. Even after the product leaves the shop, contractors often perform final on-site adjustments, cutting the material to fit precisely around sinks and appliances. It is during these stages—where the stone is cut or ground—that the high concentrations of silica are released into the air as fine dust.
Industry leaders, including Cambria, have consistently maintained that the danger lies in the “process, not the product.” Their defense rests on the argument that silicosis injuries and deaths are the result of fabrication shops failing to implement proper safety protocols. They argue that if shops used safe methods, their workers would not be at risk.
However, worker advocates and health experts, including Hanicker, argue that even the most rigorous safety measures are often insufficient. Many shops attempt to mitigate dust exposure by becoming “wet shops,” using water-fed saws and specialized vacuum systems to trap silica nanoparticles. Hanicker points out that “even wet cutting is still dangerous.” Once the resulting “slurry”—the mixture of water and silica dust—dries, it reverts to a hazardous powder.
Maintenance of safety equipment also presents a significant exposure risk. “Even if it gets sucked into a vacuum, somebody still has to clean that filter out,” Hanicker noted, emphasizing that human interaction with the dust is a near-certainty in the fabrication environment, regardless of the initial form the dust takes. By backing legislation that classifies the material itself as safe, Florida officials are moving to protect corporate manufacturers from the legal consequences of a manufacturing process that critics say is fundamentally incompatible with worker safety.
