Historic U.S. Supreme Court Ruling Blocks Roundup Lawsuits

The U.S. Supreme Court has delivered a historic verdict, halting lawsuits that alleged the herbicide Roundup, containing glyphosate, posed a cancer risk and lacked adequate warnings. The decision, supported by seven of the nine justices, centers on cases seeking to link the product to health concerns.

Justices favoring Bayer, the company that acquired Monsanto (the original maker of Roundup), reasoned that the company could not be blamed for not including an additional health warning. They argued that doing so would have contradicted federal regulations. The ruling establishes that federal law takes precedence over state-specific claims regarding insufficient warnings.

“

The Supreme Court of the United States issued a landmark 7-2 ruling in the Durnell Roundup™ case, confirming that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) expressly preempts state law failure-to-warn claims when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a definitive determination on the product's safety.

Bayer hailed the decision, stating, "The Supreme Court of the United States issued a landmark 7-2 ruling in the Durnell Roundup™ case, confirming that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) expressly preempts state law failure-to-warn claims when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a definitive determination on the product's safety." The company emphasized that this ruling provides significant containment for Roundup litigation and reinforces that the EPA's safety assessment is binding law.

The ruling specifically overturned a Missouri jury's verdict that had awarded $1.25 million to John Durnell, who claimed he developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after exposure to the herbicide. Bayer asserted that the majority opinion clarified that Durnell's claim, based on state law, would have necessitated a cancer warning beyond what the EPA required under FIFRA, thus confirming FIFRA's preemptive authority. The company believes this decision should lead to the dismissal of current warning-based lawsuits and deter future ones.

“

This decision confirms that the EPA's determination of safety is law, ensuring that companies cannot be penalized under a heterogeneous set of state laws for complying with federal labeling requirements.