Skip to main content

mastodon - Link to source

"Bayer/Monsanto Wins Roundup Case as Supreme Court Blocks Suit over Link Between Herbicide & Cancer

(video)

The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 to restrict thousands of lawsuits claiming Bayer, the parent company of Monsanto, had a duty to warn consumers about potential cancer risks from its popular weed killer Roundup. The case before the Supreme Court began in St. Louis, Missouri, where a resident named John Durnell, who had used Roundup for decades and was later diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, sued Monsanto under Missouri state law for not putting a warning label on its product. But because the federal Environmental Protection Agency found no cancer risk in its assessment of Roundup, the court has ruled against Durnell.

democracynow.org/2026/6/26/we_…

#bayer #monsanto #SCOTUS #cancer #pesticides #climate #nature #forests #usa #herbicides #EPA #glyphosate

“The ruling essentially says that only the EPA can make a determination that something is harmful to us and has to carry a warning label,” explains reporter Nate Halverson, who has been documenting health and environmental harms allegedly linked to Roundup, as well as efforts to hold Monsanto accountable. In his reporting, Halverson found that scientific studies cited by the EPA in its Roundup assessment were “ghostwritten” by Monsanto itself — and “that ghostwritten information has now made its way into the Supreme Court’s decision.”

Bayer/Monsanto Wins Roundup Case as Supreme Court Blocks Suit over Link Between Herbicide & Cancer

Democracy Now!
#nature #climate #USA #cancer #scotus #forests #pesticides #epa #glyphosate #monsanto #bayer #herbicides
This entry was edited (4 weeks ago)
in reply to Regendans

volkris
qoto - Link to source
volkris
• •

Democracy Now is not a reliable source. They wear their biases on their sleeves, and this summary is very misleading.

The Supreme Court ruling wasn't about restricting lawsuits, and it wasn't "because the federal Environmental Protection Agency found no cancer risk".

What it found was that since EPA required a certain label, state law couldn't compel violation of federal law by changing that label.

Pretty big difference!

⇧