US supreme court rules in favor of former Monsanto company in pesticide case
Summary
The US Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of the former Monsanto company, blocking many lawsuits that claimed Roundup’s main chemical causes cancer. The court decided that federal law overseeing pesticides prevents state lawsuits about failing to warn users when the EPA has not required such warnings.Key Facts
- The case is Monsanto v Durnell and centers on whether federal pesticide law stops state claims about warning labels.
- The court referenced the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (Fifra) for its decision.
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion; Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.
- Glyphosate, the main chemical in Roundup, was labeled a probable cancer risk by the World Health Organization in 2015.
- Bayer, which owns Monsanto, faces over 100,000 lawsuits claiming glyphosate caused cancer but argues the EPA’s approval means no warning was needed.
- The EPA says glyphosate is unlikely to cause cancer and has not required cancer warnings on labels.
- The ruling also affects similar lawsuits against Syngenta, accused of causing Parkinson’s disease with a different pesticide.
- Environmental groups disagree with the decision, saying it protects companies instead of people and the environment.
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.