Supreme Court blocks lawsuit over Roundup cancer warning
SCOTUS has blocked a lawsuit over the herbicide Roundup, ruling that the manufacturer cannot be sued for failing to warn that the product could cause cancer.
On June 25, the Supreme Court ruled that the manufacturer of the herbicide Roundup cannot be sued for failing to warn that the product could cause cancer, blocking thousands of lawsuits against the company.
Roundup users who have developed cancer claim the herbicide violates state dangerous products laws, and public health groups say the lawsuit is necessary because the Environmental Protection Agency, which regulates pesticides, is failing to protect Americans from risks associated with glyphosate, Roundup’s main ingredient.
The EPA has not determined that Roundup poses a cancer risk and does not require it to be labeled as such. Bayer, which acquired Roundup maker Monsanto in 2018, insists the product is safe for human use.
What are the health concerns about Roundup?
Concerns about glyphosate’s negative health effects have been raised for many years.
A lawsuit against Monsanto began in 2015 after the World Health Organization said glyphosate was “probably carcinogenic to humans,” a finding the company disputes. In December, a 2000 scientific review widely cited as showing the chemical’s safety was retracted, citing conflicts of interest between the authors and Monsanto.
John Darnell, who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a type of blood cancer, after using the herbicide for more than 20 years, became one of tens of thousands of Americans to sue the makers of Roundup.
Darnell argued that Monsanto should have warned consumers that Roundup could be carcinogenic or that they should wear protective equipment when using Roundup. A St. Louis jury sided with him.
Bayer has stopped using glyphosate in Roundup products sold for home use, but the company said it may also have to stop selling glyphosate to U.S. farmers if the lawsuit continues. Major agricultural groups warned that this poses a “catastrophic risk to the U.S. food supply.”
Dr. Amar Rewari, chief of radiation oncology at Luminis Health and adjunct assistant professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, told USA TODAY that glyphosate is “one of the most extensively studied herbicides in the world, but remains the subject of ongoing scientific debate as different institutions interpret the available evidence differently.”
In terms of cancer prevention, Rewari said she generally encourages people to focus first on “factors for which the evidence is stronger, such as avoiding tobacco, maintaining a healthy weight, limiting alcohol intake, remaining physically active, protecting the skin from excessive UV exposure, and continuing recommended cancer screenings.”
At the same time, continued research on environmental exposures remains important, and continued scientific scrutiny of products such as glyphosate is appropriate.”
How is the MAHA movement involved?
The Trump administration had previously endorsed Bayer in a move that disrupted the “Make America Healthier” movement, which seeks to reduce pesticide use.
On February 18, President Donald Trump issued an executive order increasing the domestic supply of glyphosate for national defense.
U.S. Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was selected by President Trump to head the Department of Health and Human Services, said he supports the president despite the backlash from MAHA supporters.
Kennedy, who sued Monsanto over Roundup when he was a lawyer, co-founded one of the groups that filed a brief in support of Darnell.
Bani Hari, a food advocate who has worked with the Trump administration on MAHA-aligned policies, said she was “disgusted” by the court’s latest ruling.
Hari criticized the administration’s support for Bayer, adding that the ball is now in Congress’ court.
“The Supreme Court handed a victory to Monsanto, and now it’s up to Congress to decide whether justice lies with the American people or with the most powerful corporate lobbyists in Washington,” she said. “Every member of Congress will have to choose between their families and the toxic lobby, and voters will remember that choice in November.”
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker said at a news conference hosted by advocacy groups Protect Our Care and 314 Action that his heart goes out to all the workers and their families who are “fighting cancers that didn’t need to happen.”
He said the court sided with the companies and against the people in this case.
“What’s worse is that the president who said he supported MAHA has now betrayed the MAHA movement by siding with big business and the people who are poisoning the people of our country,” Booker added. “Today is a really difficult day.”
Oncologist and Montana state representative Dr. Melody Cunningham called the decision a “public health travesty” at a press conference.
“This decision does not say Roundup and glyphosate are safe,” she added.
But other companies also praised the ruling, including Bayer, which said it would help significantly limit litigation.
“This decision brings overdue justice on a matter that should have been brought to light sooner,” Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said in a statement. “It’s time to forget about it.”
Contributors: Maureen Groppe, Edward Caves, America Today, Swapna Venugopal
