US supreme court to hear case that could weaken consumers’ ability to sue for failure to warn of product risks
Summary
The US Supreme Court will hear a case about the weed-killing chemical glyphosate, used in products like Roundup. The court’s decision could make it harder for consumers to sue companies that do not warn about risks if the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not required those warnings.Key Facts
- The case focuses on glyphosate, a chemical linked to cancer by some studies and labeled a probable carcinogen by the World Health Organization in 2015.
- Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, faces over 100,000 lawsuits claiming it failed to warn users about cancer risks.
- Monsanto argues that under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), it cannot be sued if the EPA has not found a cancer risk or required a warning.
- The EPA states glyphosate is “unlikely” to cause cancer.
- Bayer supports a court ruling in its favor to end ongoing lawsuits.
- Syngenta, another pesticide company facing similar legal issues, supports Monsanto’s position.
- Some former EPA officials argue that states should have a role in deciding pesticide warnings, opposing Monsanto’s view.
- The Trump administration supports Monsanto in court and through policy, while some public groups protest to protect consumer health.
Read the Full Article
This is a fact-based summary from The Actual News. Click below to read the complete story directly from the original source.