The Trump administration supports Bayer’s argument that it cannot sue for failing to warn that Roundup could cause cancer.
How are Supreme Court justices nominated, confirmed, and opposed?
The Supreme Court is a critical component of our democracy. Here’s how the process for nominating, confirming, and opposing potential judges works.
FAQ only, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court will decide whether to block thousands of lawsuits alleging Monsanto Co. failed to warn people that its popular herbicide could cause cancer.
The court agreed on January 16 to review a lower court’s decision upholding a $1.25 million judgment against Monsanto’s parent company, Bayer. This is just one of many lawsuits the company is fighting.
A St. Louis jury sided with John Darnell, arguing that Darnell’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was caused by exposure to the herbicide Roundup.
Darnell argued that Monsanto should have warned consumers that Roundup could be carcinogenic or that they should wear protective equipment when using Roundup.
Bayer said such a warning is not only not required by the Environmental Protection Agency, but would also violate federal law.
The position has changed since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, and the Justice Department now says the Supreme Court should get involved.
U.S. Attorney General John Sauer said in court that the EPA had approved the label without a cancer warning and that Monsanto could not change the label without EPA approval.
“After careful scientific review and evaluation of hundreds of thousands of public comments, EPA has repeatedly determined that glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic to humans, and EPA has repeatedly approved Roundup labels that do not contain cancer warnings,” Sauer wrote.
Sauer said companies should not be subject to different labeling requirements in 50 states.
Mr. Darnell’s lawyers argued that Mr. Darnell relied not only on the label, but also on Monsanto’s advertisements touting Roundup as safe to spray without protective equipment.
The case against Monsanto began in 2015, when the World Health Organization said a key ingredient in Roundup was “probably carcinogenic to humans.”
Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, has discontinued the use of glyphosate in Roundup, which is sold to customers for use on lawns and gardens, even though it claims it is safe for people to use. But Bayer has said it may remove glyphosate from agricultural markets, citing the threat posed by the more than 100,000 lawsuits it faces.
The American Farm Bureau Federation and other agricultural groups said in court that glyphosate is “essential to sustaining American agriculture in the 21st century.”
“Removing glyphosate from the market would pose an immediate and catastrophic risk to America’s food supply,” the organizations said in a filing supporting Bayer.
Bayer, which has already paid billions of dollars in settlements from Roundup lawsuits, is pushing state legislatures to pass legislation that would protect Bayer from liability.
Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said the Supreme Court’s appellate decision was “an important step in a multi-pronged strategy to significantly contain this litigation.”
“It’s time for America’s legal system to establish that companies should not be penalized under state law for complying with federal warning label requirements,” Anderson said in a statement.
The court is expected to hear oral arguments in Monsanto v. Darnell this spring and issue a decision by late June or early July.
