Washington– The Supreme Court appeared divided Monday on whether to block thousands of lawsuits alleging that the maker of the weed killer Roundup failed to warn people that it may cause cancer.
The case came before the justices after a tidal wave of lawsuits that included some multibillion-dollar judgments against global agrichemical maker Bayer, which owns pharmaceutical maker Monsanto.
Several justices seemed sympathetic to the company’s argument that it could not be sued under state law because federal regulators found Roundup likely did not cause cancer. However, others have questioned lawyers about whether that wrongly prevents states from responding to changing research.
News reporting maker Monsanto has the backing of the Trump administration, a legal position at odds with some allies “Make America Healthy Again” movement. Who want to curb the use of pesticides.
On the other side is a man from Missouri named John Durnell. His lawsuit said he developed a cancer called non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after more than 20 years working as the neighborhood association’s “sprinkler man,” using Roundup in parks in his historic St. Louis community.
The jury agreed that the company failed to warn him about the potential cancer risks and awarded him $1.25 million. It is one of thousands of similar cases, including Some billions of dollars Damage awards.
There is still intense controversy surrounding cancer and the main ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified the chemical as “probably carcinogenic” in 2015, but the Environmental Protection Agency determined it to be carcinogenic. Not likely to be carcinogenic For humans when used as directed.
The agency approved the label without a cancer warning, and Bayer says it was required to follow those federal standards — not the state laws under which Durnell and others sued.
On the other hand, Dornel’s lawyers say federal law doesn’t prevent Bayer from putting a fuller warning on its products under state law.
Bayer disputes the cancer claims but has set aside $16 billion to settle the cases He proposed a major settlement Earlier this year. At the same time, it tried to persuade states to pass laws preventing new cases A few agreed.
The company has encountered more than 100,000 Roundup claims, most of them from home users. It has discontinued the use of glyphosate in Roundup sold in the residential lawn and garden market in the United States. The company said it may have to consider withdrawing glyphosate from US agricultural markets if the lawsuits continue.
Farmers at the Modern Ag Alliance, a group founded by Bayer, said they were concerned it could hurt the agricultural industry at a time when it is already under pressure.
Environmental groups say Bayer wants to keep juries out of lawsuits because of its losses in state courts.
The pesticides created a rift between the administration and members of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy’s MAHA movement. Kennedy, who were also frustrated by an executive order aimed at boosting glyphosate production.
Kennedy himself has repeatedly said that glyphosate causes cancer, even as he said he recognized that the executive order was necessary for the food supply and for national security reasons.
Dozens of MAHA activists and supporters gathered Monday outside the Supreme Court in what they called a “People Against Poison” march to denounce Monsanto’s efforts to protect itself from lawsuits.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the case by the end of June.
__
Associated Press writer Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report.