The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the maker of Roundup can’t be sued for failing to warn people that the weedkiller could cause cancer.
The opinion issued Thursday is expected to block thousands of cancer lawsuits filed against Monsanto, which is now owned by Bayer. And it follows failed efforts in the Iowa Legislature and Congress to limit lawsuits over pesticide-related illness.
Aaron Lehman, president of the Iowa Farmers Union, said the decision is “a huge step backward for Iowa farmers.”
“We have a real cancer problem here in Iowa, and farming is already dangerous enough,” he said. “So putting more barriers between farmers and their ability to protect their health and defend their health is a bad idea.”
Lehman said the decision gives “blanket protections” to pesticide companies and removes any incentives for them to make safer formulations of glyphosate — the active ingredient in Roundup — and other products.
Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said the decision is good for American farmers.
“It provides the regulatory clarity necessary for innovators like us to develop the agricultural tools that guarantee an affordable food supply,” Anderson said. “This litigation has enormous costs for the company and has impacted public trust. The decision brings overdue justice on an issue that should have been clarified much earlier. It’s time to put it behind us.”
A bill first proposed by Bayer in Iowa’s 2024 legislative session to limit lawsuits by Iowans seeking compensation for pesticide-related illnesses narrowly passed the state Senate last year but failed to advance through the House. The legislation sparked protests and a fierce debate at the Iowa Capitol.
The Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, along with major agricultural organizations like the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation and the Iowa Corn Growers Association, lobbied for the lawsuit limits. They argued the lawsuits targeting Roundup could jeopardize farmers’ access to the popular weedkiller and threaten the production of glyphosate at a plant in Muscatine.
The Iowa Association for Justice, which has lobbied against pesticide lawsuit limits, said Thursday’s decision is devastating.
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling guts the rights of Roundup victims to seek justice in court,” said Andrew Mertens, executive director of the Iowa Association for Justice. “This hands liability immunity to a foreign corporation and rewards bad actors. But this does not have to be the final word.”
Bayer has argued that because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found glyphosate is unlikely to cause cancer, the company is not allowed to include a cancer warning on Roundup’s EPA-approved label. Therefore, Bayer claims the company should not be sued for not putting a cancer warning on the label.
Mertens said Congress wrote the law that the Supreme Court’s ruling relies on, and he expects the American people will demand that Congress change the law.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer has concluded glyphosate is probably carcinogenic. And last year, a study that found glyphosate wasn’t a human health risk was retracted by the scientific journal that published it in 2000.
Candidates for Iowa governor weigh in
The Republican and Democratic candidates for Iowa governor have both said they would oppose attempts to shield pesticide companies from health-related lawsuits.
Republican Zach Lahn, who is aligned with the “Make American Healthy Again” movement, posted on the social media site X calling the ruling a “terrible decision.”
“This is not a win for farmers – in any way,” he wrote. “Farmers have now lost their ability to have recourse when they are harmed by these products. This is happening at higher rates for them than the average population in relation to the specific cancers these products are known to cause. Civil liability is a key part of the free market and that has now been taken away to the detriment of the people.”
Democrat Rob Sand also criticized the ruling.
“This decision is wrong, gross and will continue to make life worse for Iowans,” he said. “Government insiders here in Iowa have already tried to grant immunity for companies poisoning Iowans with cancer-causing chemicals. My position is clear: no immunity for chemical companies sickening Iowans.”
