SCOTUS Takes Up Decision on the Legality of Glyphosate Lawsuits

Last week the U.S. Supreme Court justices decided to rule on a case of whether a state court wrongly awarded a sizeable compensatory verdict to a plaintiff alleging a non-Hodgkin lymphoma diagnosis resulted from the use of the popular herbicide Roundup which includes the active ingredient glyphosate. At issue is billions of dollars in damages that Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018, could be forced to pay from thousands of subsequent lawsuits. Bayer contends that states can’t legally require a cancer warning on the product, since EPA has concluded that Roundup doesn’t pose a risk when used according to its label.

Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) advocates have campaigned for the Trump administration to take a tougher approach on pesticides, even going so far as leading a petition calling on Trump to fire EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. David Murphy, founder of United We Eat and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s finance director on his failed presidential campaign, stated, “This is a fundamental betrayal of Trump’s promises on the campaign to Make America Healthy Again.” The move comes after the White House urged the Supreme Court to weigh in on the case over the objections of MAHA advocates and green groups. In Congress, MAHA advocates have opposed bipartisan legislation that would have granted Bayer legal immunity from lawsuits, threatening to challenge GOP lawmakers who supported the measure. Republicans ultimately dropped the language from an appropriations bill, but House Agriculture Chair Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) has said he plans to include it in the farm bill.

Bayer CEO Bill Anderson, in a statement, called the court’s move “good news for U.S. farmers, who need regulatory clarity.” The company has said a ruling against it would jeopardize innovative tools for farmers and hurt the overall U.S. economy.