WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case concerning Monsanto’s liability for lawsuits alleging a link between its Roundup weed killer and cancer. The court announced Friday it will review Monsanto’s claim that it should be protected from legal action because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not mandated a cancer warning label on Roundup products.
The Core of the Dispute
The justices will not directly rule on whether Roundup’s key ingredient, glyphosate, causes cancer. Studies on glyphosate have yielded conflicting results, with some identifying it as a likely carcinogen and others finding no significant cancer risk for humans. Instead, the court will address a legal question: does federal law, specifically the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, prevent individuals from suing under state law for failing to warn of potential dangers when the EPA has not required that warning?
This case has significant implications for Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, which faces over 100,000 lawsuits from plaintiffs who allege Roundup caused their cancer diagnoses. A ruling in Monsanto’s favor could shield the company from these claims.
The Argument for Federal Protection
Monsanto argues that the EPA has consistently determined glyphosate does not cause cancer after more than five decades of study. The company stated the EPA would consider a cancer warning label to be “misbranded.” They contend that Missouri law effectively requires them to include a warning the EPA specifically rejects, creating a conflict with federal regulations.
The Counter Argument
Environmental advocates, including lawyers for EarthJustice, argue the court should not protect manufacturers from accountability when their products potentially cause harm. Patti Goldman, a senior attorney, stated that state court lawsuits “provide the only real path to accountability” when individuals develop cancer after using pesticides.
Lawyers from the Trump administration also urged the court to hear the case, noting the EPA has approved hundreds of Roundup labels without requiring a cancer warning.
What’s Next?
The Supreme Court is likely to hear arguments in the case of Monsanto vs. Durnell in April and is expected to issue a ruling by late June. A decision could clarify the extent to which federal law preempts state law in cases involving pesticide labeling and potential health risks. Monsanto has removed Roundup from consumer products, but it remains available for agricultural use.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is glyphosate?
Glyphosate is the key ingredient in Roundup, a widely used herbicide. Some studies have found it is a likely carcinogen, while others have concluded it does not pose a true cancer risk for humans.
How many lawsuits are involved?
Monsanto and Bayer currently face legal claims from more than 100,000 plaintiffs who allege Roundup caused their cancer diagnoses.
What did the EPA say about a cancer warning label?
The EPA has repeatedly determined that glyphosate does not cause cancer and has stated that adding a cancer warning label to Roundup products would be considered “misbranded.”
As the Supreme Court prepares to weigh in, how might this ruling affect the future of product liability lawsuits involving federally regulated products?
