Supreme Court Hears Case On How To Label Risks of Popular Weed Killer (npr.org)
- Reference: 0183017882
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/26/04/28/0421237/supreme-court-hears-case-on-how-to-label-risks-of-popular-weed-killer
- Source link: https://www.npr.org/2026/04/27/nx-s1-5793804/supreme-court-monsanto-roundup-arguments
> A divided U.S. Supreme Court on Monday [1]heard a dispute over labels on the popular Roundup weed killer , which thousands of people blame for their cancers. How the Supreme Court rules could have implications for tens of thousands of lawsuits against Roundup maker Monsanto, which is now owned by Bayer. The case centers on who decides about warning labels on chemicals: the federal government -- or states or juries. [...] The justices will not be evaluating whether glyphosate causes cancer. Rather, they'll consider who should decide what appears on warning labels and whether states have a role to play after the EPA weighs in.
>
> The current U.S. solicitor general backed Monsanto. Sarah Harris, his principal deputy, said the Environmental Protection Agency is in the driver's seat, not anyone in Missouri. "Missouri thus requires adding cancer warnings but federal law requires EPA to approve new warnings and tasks EPA with deciding what label changes would mitigate any health risks," Harris argued. "State law must give way." Several justices, including Brett Kavanaugh, appeared to agree with Monsanto's argument about the need for a single, uniform standard across the country.
>
> But others, like Chief Justice John Roberts, wondered what would happen if the federal government moved more slowly than states did, who wanted to act quickly on information about new dangers. "Well, it does undermine the uniformity," Roberts said. "On the other hand, if it turns out they were right, it might have been good if they had an opportunity to do something, to call this danger to the attention of people while the federal government was going through its process," he said about states.
>
> Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked about the emergence of new science, and the EPA's reviews. "There's a 15-year window between when that product has to be re-registered again and lots of things can happen in science, in terms of development about the product," she said. Bayer, which now owns Monsanto, only sells Roundup that contains glyphosate to farmers and businesses these days. Bayer has been pushing to resolve scores of the residential cases through a sweeping settlement, trying to put the costly claims behind it.
[1] https://www.npr.org/2026/04/27/nx-s1-5793804/supreme-court-monsanto-roundup-arguments
The law won't solve the problem (Score:3)
Engineering will
When robots with lasers can selectively kill weeds and bugs, the need for herbicides and insecticides will disappear
Re: (Score:2)
We have robots which can do that, but they will not be cheaper than glyphosate for the foreseeable future, so they won't be used. And any time soon, they will be MASSIVELY more expensive, so it's not realistic that they will be mandated any time soon either.
EPA decision? (Score:2)
How will this affect all the companies that just go ahead and slap California Proposition 65 labels on everything? To prophylactically prevent prosecution there?
If the US Supreme Court is going to attempt bringing everyone in line to follow uniform regulations and eliminate Cali's interference with the Commerce Clause, they really have their work cut out for them. It is a noble undertaking to be sure, but I fear a bit too late.
Small enough to drown in a bathtub (Score:2)
The right wing and the corporatists always want to put everything on the state level. That's because they can exercise complete control over government and you at the state level.
The national level is too big for them to control completely. There's too much money and too many people to bribe and too many eyeballs on everything.
The county level doesn't work either. It's too expensive to take over everything. You can do highly effective voter suppression at the county level because you can Target that
Nut jobs everywhere (Score:2)
I'm a medicinal chemist and have been for 45 years. I also tend to vote fairly liberally, though the leftists thought police were beginning to get on my nerves. Anyhow, my feeling is that glyphosate is probably a lot safer than anything that we try to replace it with, that works as well. When anything has been used as much a glyphosate and the only people sure of it's toxicity are lawyers, then you've got a pretty safe agent. Go to Lowe's hardware and get a container of new Roundup and read the label. The n
Re: (Score:2)
The science is on the manufacturer's side.
Re: What does the science say? (Score:2)
Science or scientists?
Re: (Score:1)
It's kinda how the oil companies spent decades trotting out their own scientists to pretend global warming wasn't real. Certain people will not accept anything short of a double-blind study where human participants are intentionally exposed to Roundup until they get cancer. These are the same types of morons who look at every snowstorm as proof global warming doesn't exist.
Re: (Score:3)
> The science is on the manufacturer's side.
What?
[1]https://publichealth.gmu.edu/n... [gmu.edu]
[2]https://www.sciencedirect.com/... [sciencedirect.com]
[3]https://www.pan-europe.info/pr... [pan-europe.info]
[4]https://link.springer.com/arti... [springer.com]
You wouldn't know science if it gave a lecture up your ass.
[1] https://publichealth.gmu.edu/news/2025-06/international-study-reveals-glyphosate-weed-killers-cause-multiple-types-cancer
[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2152265025042855
[3] https://www.pan-europe.info/press-releases/2025/06/new-scientific-publication-confirms-glyphosate-causes-cancer-eu-%E2%80%9Csafe%E2%80%9D
[4] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-018-0184-7
Re: (Score:2)
Everything is a carcinogen, it's the exposure and amount that matters. Glyphosate has been around for 40 years, its much safer than other weed killers. If we do away with roundup, we'll go the next rung up the ladder and start using that herbicide that is more toxic. People need to be reasonable, it's not all or nothing and we have to use something, those in an urban environment where there aren't many weeds won't understand, if you have a backyard full of them, it comes in quite handy vs pulling them.