GMWatch News Review archive

Review 586: Glyphosate – Legal and Political Developments

Print
Details

 

 
Image
While our last Review covered the latest findings confirming the health dangers of glyphosate, in this Review we focus mainly on a series of important recent legal and political developments, most of which have taken place in the US. But we also have important news from the EU, the UK, France, New Zealand, Canada and Brazil (see REST OF THE WORLD and LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS). 

The US dominates our coverage though – and not just because of the ongoing glyphosate litigation (see LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS), which is taking such a toll on Bayer that the company is claiming it may have to get out of the glyphosate business altogether (see BAYER SEEKS LEGAL IMMUNITY), or even make its Monsanto subsidiary bankrupt (see BAYER’S BUSINESS CRISIS). We also focus on the US because of the desperate battle Bayer is waging at both the state and federal levels, as well as through the appeal courts – with its eyes on the Supreme Court on June 26, in its pursuit of a get-out-of-jail-free card for itself and the rest of the pesticide industry (see BAYER SEEKS LEGAL IMMUNITY).  

In the midst of these bitter legal and political disputes has come the publication of the “MAHA report” by US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which clearly identifies glyphosate as a potential contributor to chronic illnesses in children. As a result, as one commentator put it, “some of the most awful agricultural vested interests”, which includes “the GMO foods lobby”, have been spitting blood. Indeed, they began pushing back hard on the glyphosate issue well before the report was published. (The report has also faced strong criticism from other quarters – see THE MAHA REPORT). 

And the bad news for Bayer and other pesticide makers just keeps coming. And it involves a lot more than just glyphosate (see LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS and MORE TOXICS).
NEW VIDEOS
The deadly glyphosate cover up: How Monsanto poisoned rural America 
In an excellent new 14-minute video, the US non-profit newsroom More Perfect Union explores the disturbing background to Bayer’s current mission to rewrite laws to give the company immunity from future lawsuits – all while continuing to make billions in profit from a product linked to cancer. Journalist and author Carey Gillam is among the main contributors.
Pesticides: a life ruined by glyphosate
This 8-minute Euronews video, in French with English sub-titles, together with a news article in English, features Ludovic Maugé, a former landscaper, whose cancer from using Roundup is recognised as an occupational disease. As a result he receives a modest amount monthly in compensation from Bayer-Monsanto, which manufactured the product that poisoned him. But this news report also explains the context of his illness – the failings of regulators who continue to allow glyphosate-based herbicides to stay on the market. Euronews also has a shorter video report (3:33) about Ludovic Maugé’s experience as a glyphosate victim, entitled, The impact of glyphosate on real lives, in which he comments, “The pain is constant… When I see politicians reauthorising these [glyphosate] products, I am outraged."
Glyphosate, GMOs, and growing food sustainably, featuring Chuck Benbrook
In an in-depth hour-long Back to the People podcast, Nicole Shanahan interviews the agricultural economist Chuck Benbrook, a well-known expert on pesticides and sustainable farming, about glyphosate. As well as publishing scientific papers on glyphosate, Dr Benbrook has served as an expert witness during the last several years of glyphosate litigation.
THE MAHA REPORT
MAHA report applauded for calling out chemical harms, but criticised for falling short
Exposures to pesticides and other chemicals, ultra-processed foods and over-prescription of medications are among the factors contributing to an epidemic of chronic disease in America’s children, according to a US government assessment report, issued by the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission. Summarising the report, Carey Gillam writes that it calls for a “transformation” of US food, health and “scientific systems” to address the “sickest generation in American history in terms of chronic disease”. The report blames complacency in scientific and medical institutions, corrupt federal and state policies guided “more by corporate profit than the public interest”, and US food and agricultural systems that have “embraced ultra-processed ingredients and synthetic chemicals”. The report calls out corporate influence over research, regulators and lawmakers as factors contributing to the problems. The commission’s work, led by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has been under close scrutiny and generated pushback from powerful industry interests, even before it was released. Public health advocates had mixed reactions to the report, applauding key points but with many wishing the report had gone farther, and saying industry pressure likely helped suppress any meaningful policy change recommendations.
Trump-backed pesticide report led by RFK Jr. draws fire from agrichemical industry
George Kimbrell, co-executive director of the Center for Food Safety, calls the MAHA assessment report a “baby step” in the right direction and acknowledges the tone over pesticide regulations could be shifting. “Going back my entire career, 20-plus years now of doing this work, it doesn’t matter if it’s a Democratic administration or a Republican administration, they have been beholden to and done the wishes of the pesticide industry,” Kimbrell said. “So, this is a unique moment where… there’s a chance that there could be some positive change in terms of responsible oversight for these toxins.” But the report itself, Kimbrell says, “falls woefully short of providing any next steps”, as it does not call for specific regulatory changes or restrictions on pesticides used in farming, even while it highlights studies linking health disorders in humans and animals to pesticides like glyphosate and atrazine. It just says these chemicals should be further researched. Meanwhile, Trump’s campaign and presidency have received millions of dollars in donations from the world’s largest agrichemical companies, who also spend heavily on federal lobbyists, and they are pushing back hard on the concerns expressed in the report and against the policy and legal reforms needed to tackle them. 
Epic battle brewing over the direction of the Trump administration
In the run up to the publication of the MAHA report, Lori Ann Burd, senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, a group that has long sought a US ban on atrazine and other pesticides, told the New York Times that she sees an uneasy but potentially powerful alignment of interests in favour of better regulation of such chemicals. “There’s an epic battle brewing over the direction that the administration is going to take on toxic chemicals,” she said. “This is the movement that helped to elect Trump. But we’re also up against some of the most powerful corporate lobby groups in the country.”
MAHA or misdirection?
“The bright spot of the MAHA report,” according to food industry veteran Errol Schweizer, “is that some of the most awful agricultural vested interests, such as soy and corn grower associations, agrochemical interests and the GMO foods lobby, are pissed off by its findings. Their golden geese, such as the herbicides glyphosate and atrazine that are used across millions of acres of GMO corn and soy production, are justifiably in the MAHA crosshairs”. Schweizer adds, “For a report of this scale and visibility to be issued under a Republican Administration is unprecedented. For the Democrats… to leave this policy opening to the Trump team is bizarre, and frankly, unforgivable. Republicans have absorbed the burgeoning MAHA coalition and the report appears to be a first step to operationalize the momentum.” But, says Schweizer, the assessment report also contains a lot of misleading nationalistic rhetoric (claims like “American farmers feed the world”, etc.), and weak structural analysis of the real sources of the harms it identifies. As a result, “the overall impact feels like misdirection, making big statements one way, while the administration’s day to day actions are 180 degrees opposed”. This means – for the moment at least – the report is, “at best, just high profile virtue signalling, without policy actions and funding committed to actually doing things about the problems it articulates”. 
We’ve been played: A doctor’s warning to the wellness world
Physician Amy B. Killen MD also thinks the policies of the Trump Administration are actively undermining the purported goals of the MAHA Commission. And she responded to the assessment report by saying, “You’ve been played”. She says while some wellness advocates are celebrating the report’s emphasis on removing red dye from foods and addressing the issue of environmental toxins, “something sinister is happening behind the scenes” – namely Trump's “aggressive deregulation” and “pro-Big Agriculture and pro-Big Industry policies”. These include an indefinite pause on glyphosate restrictions and delayed action on PFAS (“forever chemicals”) limits in drinking water. She also draws attention to the Trump administration’s attempt to fast-track GMO approvals with weaker safety reviews, though this has been rolled back by a court ruling. Dr Killen says people need to “Stop letting politicians weaponize your legitimate health concerns while simultaneously poisoning the environment that makes health possible”. And she concludes, “We in the wellness world need to pull our heads out of our asses and start making noise about the policies that determine whether wellness is possible.”
Don’t bank on the MAHA strategy report delivering on glyphosate
The Make Our Children Healthy Again Assessment report that came out in late May was intended to investigate the root causes of chronic illnesses in the US. The MAHA Commission is scheduled to follow up with policy recommendations, based on the assessment report, in a Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy report in mid-August. But columnist Dave Dickey warns that though “Big Ag in general, and in particular, pesticide producers – most notably those that manufacture chlorpyrifos and glyphosate – have been freaking out” about what policy recommendations may be coming, the strategy report “won’t target glyphosate”. He saysthat’s because “Kennedy knows that if he pushes too hard on glyphosate, Big Ag and USDA will come for him and he’ll lose. Bigly”. Kennedy is so aware of this, Dickey says, that when speaking at a Senate Appropriations Committee, he made Big Ag a promise: “One hundred percent of corn in this country relies on glyphosate. We are not going to do anything to jeopardise that business model.”
Report criticised for citing studies that don’t exist
Seven of the cited sources in the MAHA assessment report don’t appear to exist, possibly because AI was used to generate some of the citations. The food policy expert Marion Nestle said, “Nobody has ever accused RFK Jr. of academic rigour… The speed (of the MAHA report) suggests that it could not have been vetted carefully and must have been whisked through standard clearance procedures. The citation problem suggests a reliance on AI.” This has led to headlines like The MAHA Report: Make America Hallucinate Again. (See also a more positive assessment by Marion Nestle of the main content of the report.)
Saying one thing and doing another
NPR reports on how as the Trump administration promotes its “Make America Healthy Again” agenda to curb chronic disease by reducing toxic exposures, it is simultaneously cutting the research, staff, and regulations needed to do so. The public may be left with messaging about the dangers of toxic chemicals but even less protection from them.
The looming food fight over pesticides in the Republican Party
American conservative media outlet The Daily Wire says the MAHA report needs to be seen in the context of a heated battle already underway within the Republican Party (GOP). It says Republican Blake Bassham of Georgia, for example, is not pleased with Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, who recently signed legislation to shield Bayer (see BAYER SEEKS LEGAL IMMUNITY below). Bassham says, “Governor Kemp just signed a liability shield for chemical giants – quietly, behind closed doors, no cameras, no crowds. Why? Because they know it’s crony politics at its worst. Courts have found real people were harmed, and no amount of lobbyist dinners will erase that. The swamp may have won this round, but the grassroots, the MAHA moms, and freedom-loving Georgians won’t forget who sold them out”. Bassham says there is a clear line emerging between who’s really on the MAHA train and “who’s still riding with the corporate cronies of the old GOP”.
BAYER’S BUSINESS CRISIS
Top Bayer investors demand plan to end long-running crisis
Prominent German investors recently voiced exasperation over Bayer’s recurring struggles, demanding a clearer path out of the conglomerate’s crises. Deka Investment’s Ingo Speich characterized the current results of Chief Executive Officer Bill Anderson’s two-year tenure at Bayer as “disastrous”, pointing to the falling stock price, stubbornly high debt levels, and US legal problems. Once an icon of German industry, Bayer is now “at a strategic dead end,” Speich said. Since the takeover of Monsanto, other Bayer investors have likened the company to a pile of broken glass, a giant-turned-dwarf, and a burning house.
Bayer warns of lower earnings
Bayer guided for lower earnings this year as it continues to work through a turnaround plan. The company posted a fourth-quarter net loss of 335 million euros compared with a profit of 1.34 billion euros in the same quarter the previous year. 
Bayer’s costly experiment fails to give desired results
In a bold move to restore $540 million in cost savings, Bayer CEO Bill Anderson cut out most of the company’s management roles last year. In March 2024, the company slashed half its executive positions and let go another 2,000 employees in the first quarter of this year. Overall, Bayer has got rid of some 11,000 employees – almost 10% of its workforce – since first kicking off the reorganisation initiative.  But the experiment has not yielded the intended results. Bayer’s market cap has fallen more than 44% this year. The stock price hit a 20-year low last November. Bayer is still reeling from the 2018 acquisition of Monsanto, which at the time it claimedwould lead to thousands of new jobs. So far, Monsanto is a $66 billion albatross that has failed to fly. 
Bayer bankruptcy threats
A Wall Street Journal article says Bayer is thinking about a possible bankruptcy strategy for its Monsanto subsidiary in order to end the expensive legal disputes over glyphosate . The article says Bayer intends to settle the wave of US lawsuits with a settlement in a court in the state of Missouri, where most of the cases are pending, but if that fails, it would protect itself from claims by filing for bankruptcy under US law (Chapter 11). Brigitte Hincha-Weisel of the Coordination Against Bayer Dangers told the German newspaper Taz that if that happened, “It would be outrageous. Bayer is threatening partial insolvency, which would leave glyphosate victims almost empty-handed, in order to achieve the cheapest possible solution. The question is whether the courts will go along with it.” This is not the first time that a bankruptcy strategy has been floated. There was previous mention of one of the “Texas Two-Step” type bankruptcies that Johnson & Johnson has been pursuing, though without much success because it was so obviously acting in bad faith. But the WSJ says Bayer is exploring as one of its options a more traditional approach that would place Monsanto’s US business directly into Chapter 11. 
Prospect of a Monsanto bankruptcy ups Bayer’s share price
It says something about how Bayer’s shareholders regard Monsanto that on hearing it might be declared bankrupt, Bayer’s shares shot up. Remember, Monsanto is a company Bayer paid $66 billion to acquire, saying, “We are as excited as we have ever been about the [merger], and there are absolutely no regrets.”
Is Bayer really on the ropes?
Despite all the problems besetting Bayer, how seriously should we take the Roundup maker’s claims of being “on the ropes”? In GMWatch’s view, we need to bear in mind that Bayer is almost certainly promoting stories of putting Monsanto into Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and/or of withdrawing Roundup from the US market, to put pressure: 
* on plaintiffs to settle (as a Chapter 11 move would push all current and future Roundup lawsuits into the bankruptcy system), forcing a discount on payouts
* on lawmakers to pass “Cancer Gag Acts” (for more on that see BAYER SEEKS LEGAL IMMUNITY) 
* on Roundup-reliant farmers to rally to its support. 
It would also signal to Bayer’s disgruntled shareholders that it’s pursuing all possible routes out of the hugely expensive legal mess that it’s currently mired in. 
LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS
Health Canada ordered to reassess glyphosate risks, as new evidence of health harms to children from glyphosate surfaces
In a significant victory in the fight against toxics, environmental and health groups in Canada have successfully challenged the federal government’s renewal of a glyphosate product in court. In a February 2025 ruling, the Federal Court found that Health Canada’s 2022 decision to re-approve the glyphosate-based herbicide “Mad Dog Plus” was not substantiated by scientific assessment. This is because the “acceptable risk” of glyphosate was last assessed by Health Canada in 2017, and much new science on the risks has come out since. The court set aside Health Canada’s re-approval of the product and has given the department six months to assess the latest science.
New Zealand’s EPA faces High Court challenge over glyphosate
The Environmental Law Initiative (ELI) is challenging New Zealand's Environmental Protection Authority’s refusal to reassess glyphosate and glyphosate-based substances this week in the High Court. The ELI point out that the EPA has never conducted a full risk assessment of glyphosate, even though a large amount of scientific evidence as to its risks has emerged since it was first introduced to New Zealand 50 years ago. They also point out that over 90 glyphosate-based formulas have subsequently been “grandfathered” through New Zealand’s regulatory system on the basis of glyphosate’s original 1970s approval, despite the EPA not even having a record of that original approval: “They don't have a copy of that. They don't know what it is.”  
French parents sue Bayer over glyphosate birth defects in their son
Bayer was in court in eastern France on 3 April to face accusations by a French family that Bayer’s glyphosate-based herbicide caused birth defects in their son. The company has paid out billions in compensation for cancer-related cases, but this is the first case to connect the chemical with birth defects. Theo Grataloup, 17, who was born with severe abnormalities of the oesophagus and larynx, said he represents all those with birth defects. Grataloup said the case could “set a legal precedent” and “allow other victims to go to court much quicker”. 
Trial set for US beekeeper’s lawsuit against Bayer and BASF for dicamba damage
A trial date has finally been set for Arkansas beekeeper Richard Coy, who is suing Bayer and BASF over the impact of dicamba damage on his bees and his resulting loss of income. Coy’s honey farm business was driven out of Arkansas by the level of dicamba damage. The lawsuit complains Monsanto (now owned by Bayer) and BASF developed and marketed GMO dicamba-resistant crops while intentionally downplaying the dangers dicamba posed to non-resistant crops and other plant life, including native plants, flowers, bushes, vines, and other flowering plants suitable for bee foraging. 
Bayer hit with another massive verdict over Roundup cancer claims
In March a Georgia jury ordered Bayer to pay $2.1 billion to a man who says Roundup caused his cancer, marking one of the largest blows yet in the ongoing legal war over the weedkiller’s safety. The jury awarded $65 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages to John Barnes, who developed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after using Roundup.
Bayer’s Monsanto loses appeal of $611M Roundup verdict in Missouri
In late May a Missouri court upheld a $611 million verdict awarded to three people who sued Bayer alleging that Roundup caused their cancer, a ruling the company says it will further appeal.  The three-judge panel of the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District rejected all seven points of appeal filed by Bayer, including its reliance on EPA findings, and affirmed the jury’s conclusion that Roundup’s glyphosate-based formula contributed to cancer in multiple plaintiffs. It also called out the company for its handling of glyphosate. “Monsanto’s awareness of studies demonstrating the possibility of a causal relationship between glyphosate and cancer, particularly NHL [non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma], and then its decision to double down on its defence of Roundup in lieu of changing the product’s formulation or adding a warning label, demonstrates, at best, Monsanto’s indifference to or reckless disregard of the health of its customers,” the court said. “Given the reprehensibility of Monsanto's misconduct as well as the goal to deter Monsanto from continuing its strategy of pursuing profit at the expense of the health of Roundup users, a nine-to-one ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages was appropriate.”
Monsanto loses appeal over $175M Roundup cancer verdict
In another dramatic legal showdown in May that underscored the high-stakes war over product liability and federal oversight, Monsanto failed to overturn a $175 million jury verdict awarded to a Pennsylvania man who linked his cancer to the weedkiller Roundup. The Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that the jury’s award to Ernest Caranci and his wife was justifiable and constitutionally sound. The verdict struck a decisive blow against Monsanto’s long-standing legal strategy: arguing that state-level “failure to warn” claims should be pre-empted by federal law.
Court upholds $1.2 million verdict in Roundup trial that ruled weedkiller caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
In February a Missouri appeals court rejected Monsanto’s bid to overturn a $1.2 million verdict in a Roundup lawsuit, in which a jury found the controversial weedkiller caused a Missouri man to develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Monsanto argued on appeal that the failure to warn claims should be pre-empted by federal law, indicating it could not change the warning labels on Roundup without approval from the EPA. But in its opinion, the appeals court dismissed Monsanto’s arguments, pointing out that though Monsanto claimed that federal law didn’t allow it to attach a warning label: “The record contains no evidence that Monsanto either informed the EPA of the justifications for a change to its warning label or that the EPA has informed Monsanto it would not approve such a warning, and Monsanto does not specifically make these arguments on appeal.”
Monsanto ends Roundup cancer case with midtrial settlement
In mid-June, Bayer called a halt to its latest Roundup-cancer courtroom battle, settling a Missouri case after four weeks of testimony and just as the trial was coming to a close. It is among many similar cases that Bayer has settled since purchasing Roundup maker Monsanto in 2018. Settlements avoid more bad headlines hitting the share price, as details are kept confidential. During the trial, jurors heard evidence that Monsanto long had knowledge of research showing a connection between glyphosate and cancer, but worked to hide the evidence rather than warning its customers. 
Proceeds from Bayer-Monsanto settlement for false advertising go to pollinator conservation
In 2023 New York Attorney General Letitia James secured a $6.9 million settlement in a false advertising case that she had brought against Bayer CropScience and Monsanto for repeatedly making false claims that Roundup is safe and non-toxic. Now 35 New York state organisations will receive funding from that settlement to support land restoration, education, and community science projects that foster pollinator conservation. 
Lawyer demands records of Bayer’s Roundup “propaganda” campaign in Missouri
Bayer is improperly using a court order to hide details of a “propaganda” campaign targeting Missouri lawmakers and potential jurors, an emergency motion to lift the confidentiality cloak claims. In a case pending in Cole County Circuit Court, attorney Matt Clement is arguing that 46 “public relations” documents designated as confidential by Bayer’s attorneys contain no proprietary information. Instead, Clement wrote, the records – included among 20,000 delivered under discovery – detail the methods Bayer has used to influence opinion, including radio, television and print ads. “Cole County has been especially inundated with Monsanto’s propaganda,” Clement wrote in the motion seeking to unseal the records.
Bayer faces billions in payouts for decades-old toxic mess
Bayer’s Monsanto unit stopped making toxic PCBs a half century ago, but the legal fallout lingers. At the beginning of this year Bayer was hit with a $100 million verdict blaming it for students and faculty at a Seattle-area public school being sickened by exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, contained in ageing fluorescent-light fixtures. The company faces billions of dollars in exposure from a growing number of lawsuits over PCB products filed by state and local governments, school districts and individuals. 
Bayer fights plaintiffs’ billion-dollar ask in latest PCB trial
Nearly two dozen people who say they were poisoned by Monsanto-made chemicals asked a Washington state jury on 16 June for a damages award of $1.1 billion to $3.3 billion. Monsanto’s parent company, Bayer, is contesting their request. Bayer has already agreed to pay almost $2 billion in settlements in PCB cases brought by states, cities and counties.
BAYER SEEKS LEGAL IMMUNITY
Bayer tells US politicians it could halt Roundup weedkiller sales over legal risks if they don’t give it legal immunity
Bayer has told US politicians it could stop selling the popular Roundup weedkiller unless they can strengthen legal protection against product liability litigation, according to a financial analyst and a person close to the matter. The German company has said plaintiffs should not be able to take Bayer to court given that the federal US Environmental Protection Agency has repeatedly ruled the product safe to use.
Why Bayer’s threat is empty
Bayer’s threat to stop selling Roundup is clearly intended to scare farmers and lawmakers but, as GMWatch commented on X, “Roundup went off patent in 2000 and the National Pesticide Information Center says there are currently 750+ pesticides available containing glyphosate. So farmers could still poison their fields without needing to resort to Roundup – even if Bayer flees the scene.” Bayer’s counter to this is that they’re making glyphosate in the US (phosphate mining in Idaho, production in Missouri and elsewhere), whereas much of the generic glyphosate is produced in China, so suggestions have been raised – via a leafleting campaign of shadowy origin targeting lawmakers – of the Chinese Communist Party taking over essential US farming inputs. The real aim of this campaign is to persuade Republicans to support legislation to shield Bayer from lawsuits from cancer sufferers.
Trump’s EPA moves to block state pesticide labels that warn of cancer risks
Trump’s EPA is advancing a proposal, originally put forward by a number of Republican state Attorney Generals, to block states from warning consumers about herbicides and other agricultural products in their food. Among the substances that could now go undisclosed is glyphosate, which studies have linked to cancer and that Trump’s own health secretary has called a “poison”. But the new measure would declare that any label citing scientific findings not acknowledged by Trump’s EPA would “constitute misbranding”. Bayer has also helped draft a section of the federal Farm Bill aimed at limiting pesticide liability, according to a report last year in the Washington Post.
Liability shields for pesticide companies facing stiff opposition
The Modern Ag Alliance, spearheaded by Bayer, has been pouring money into US states in an effort to gain immunity to lawsuits. The good news is that while Bayer and the Modern Ag Alliance have poured money into advertising and a wave of lobbyists, grassroots efforts have mostly foiled what they thought were going to be easy wins. While this battle is not yet over for the year (there is still activity in North Carolina, Ohio and at the federal level), only Georgia and North Dakota have passed such laws. Here’s PAN North America’s summary of the state of play elsewhere:
• Introduced and reassigned to committee in the Senate: North Carolina
• Lobbyists looking to introduce language into budget bill: Ohio
• Introduced but failed to be assigned to committee: Idaho, Montana
• Assigned to committee, but failed to advance: Mississippi, Wyoming
• Removed by bill’s sponsors: Florida
• Deferred in committee until the 2026 session: Tennessee
• Failed to pass both arms of legislature: Missouri and Iowa.
As bids for legal immunity fail at the state level, Bayer looks to Supreme Court
The US Supreme Court at its June 26 conference is scheduled to consider Bayer’s request for a high court ruling on a key legal question that could dramatically impact the ongoing Roundup litigation.  Bayer’s petition asserts that federal law pre-empts state laws that allow “failure-to warn”  claims, which are at the heart of the Roundup lawsuits. Bayer claims that because the US EPA does not require a cancer warning on labels of its glyphosate-based products, the company cannot add such a warning, and thus cannot be sued for failing to warn customers. Most but not all US appeal courts have rejected this argument, so Bayer is asking Supreme Court to provide definitive guidance to state and federal courts. Alongside its efforts to get a favourable court ruling on the issue of pre-emption, Bayer has been lobbying state lawmakers across the country to pass pre-emption legislation to protect the company and other pesticide makers from litigation going forward.
Roundup pesticide debate continues following failure of Bayer-backed bill in Missouri
The Roundup pesticide debate continues following the failure in Missouri of the Bayer-backed bill, which would prevent people who blame the herbicide for causing their cancer from suing the pesticide companies. Rep. Adrian Plank opposed the bill, calling it “purchased policy”. Plank said Bayer’s push to block lawsuits is driven by greed and made possible by bought politicians. Plank said he has no doubt the bill will come up again next year. “I’m sure of it. You’ve got to remember the bill sponsor is on the board of Missouri Soy, and that’s what they want. They’re going to pander to the people who give them a bunch of money, and that’s Monsanto-Bayer.” 
No impunity for agrochemical corporations: Open Letter to Bayer’s shareholders
Before the Bayer annual shareholders meeting (AGM) on 25 April 2025, over 100 organisations from the EU, US and around the world – including GMWatch – signed an Open Letter to Bayer’s shareholders. The organisations – representing consumers, farmers, academics, human rights and environment defenders – called on them to stop Bayer’s intense lobby campaign taking place across the US, aiming to prevent citizens from going to court after suffering health damage after using Roundup or any other harmful pesticide.
REST OF THE WORLD
UK: Glyphosate use extended for further year 
Glyphosate use has been extended to the end of 2026 in Britain, after the Glyphosate Renewal Group (GRG) provided the UK Health and Safety Executive with a dossier to support their application to renew the approval of glyphosate. Bayer is the CRG’s “lead member” and their application will be considered during that period.
New Zealand: Don’t let the government poison your porridge
New Zealanders’ toast and porridge might soon have an unwelcome new ingredient. The government has recently announced it wants to allow 100 times more glyphosate residues – the main chemical in Roundup – on grains. Sign the open letter to let the Government know what you think of their idea. 
Canada: Monocultures, glyphosate fanning flames of forest fires
One practice contributing to forest fires is the widespread use of glyphosate, a herbicide sprayed to kill undergrowth, writes horticulturist Monika Rekola. The logic seems sound: clearing out the underbrush reduces the amount of fuel on the forest floor. But here’s the kicker – glyphosate also kills native plants that help retain moisture in the soil. What’s left is a dry, barren landscape, practically begging for a spark.
Brazil: Communities victimised by pesticides in Maranhão discuss their plight
The Rural Workers’ Union for the municipality of São Mateus, in Maranhão, Brazil, brought together more than 100 family farmers affected by the rain of poison caused by aerial spraying in the region. After an 11-year ban, the Federal Court authorised the aerial spraying of glyphosate by planes and drones. Glyphosate applied to GM glyphosate-tolerant soy is now being sprayed directly onto those who live and produce food in the countryside, sickening the population. The results include crops being contaminated or destroyed, fish dying in the rivers, and children’s health suffering.
MORE TOXICS
France: Alarm as bill could allow the return of banned pesticides
A proposed law that would weaken the authority of ANSES, the country’s health and environmental safety watchdog, and potentially reauthorise banned pesticides is drawing strong opposition. The far-right Republican Senator Laurent Duplomb is behind the bill, which seeks to create an agricultural advisory board, made up of representatives of agricultural interests including the pesticide industry, with power to reauthorise banned pesticides, including neonicotinoids. ANSES Director General Benoît Vallet has threatened to resign if the bill becomes law, calling it a direct threat to the integrity of scientific oversight in pesticide regulation.
France: 1,200 French doctors and scientists say pesticides bill must not pass 
In an open letter to France’s ministers of agriculture, health, and the environment, hundreds of French doctors and scientists, supported by several medical organizations, have expressed their strong opposition to the provisions of the Duplomb bill (see item above). The letter’s signatories include experts in toxicology, ecotoxicology and agronomy. They say regulation needs strengthening, not weakening, because “farmers, local residents and citizens no longer want to be used as guinea pigs”. They point out that current risk assessments are “dependent on data from manufacturers; that scientific literature “is too often marginalised” in approval processes; and that regulatory tests “do not explore all potential risks” such as, for instance, the endocrine disrupting properties of pesticides. Regulators also fail to assess the risks associated with chronic exposure to pesticides as actually used, or the potential impact of the “cocktail effect” – the mixtures of synthetic chemicals disseminated in the environment and “found in tap water, mineral waters, and our food”. The prospect of any return of banned neonicotinoids has also led to protest rallies in France by beekeepers. And parents of children harmed by pesticides have also spoken out publicly against the Duplomb bill, which is due to be voted on 30 June.
US: Catastrophic losses of bees (video)
US beekeepers discuss the catastrophic losses happening in the commercial beekeeping industry. It’s estimated the most recent winter loss rates are averaging as high as 70%-80% industry wide. They finger pesticides as a key factor.
US: Dicamba is a disaster but it cannot be sprayed on GM crops this year
Patsy Hopper dreamed of a home in the country with a garden and trees. What she didn’t count on were the herbicides that would drift in from the farmland around her, killing vegetables in her garden and wild flowers in the ditches and curling the leaves of the trees she had planted. “I have a lot of trees dying,” said Hopper. “I don’t think they’ll survive.” Hopper isn’t alone. A weedkiller called dicamba, which is used in growing GM crops such as soybeans and cotton, has become notorious for inflicting widespread damage beyond the fields where it is sprayed. Dicamba drift has harmed other farmers’ crops, as well as vegetable gardens, orchards, and natural vegetation. The damage has spawned lawsuits and hard feelings in rural communities. It even led to the killing of an Arkansas farmer. Last year a US court banned the use of the dicamba spraying on growing crops. The 2025 growing season is the first since 2016 without legal access to over-the-top versions of dicamba. 
US: Butterfly populations plummet – pesticides are a culprit
Butterfly populations in the US are plummeting, with some of the rarest facing near-total collapse, a new study has found. Researchers say studies show pesticide exposure, particularly neonicotinoids, play a particularly lethal role. People are encouraged to plant native milkweed to help monarch caterpillars, but a study in the Central Valley of California found every collected sample was contaminated with pesticides – even when landowners said they didn’t use them, suggesting drift or plants being treated prior to purchase.
Canada: Are neonics critical to all crops? Research says no
In 2018, Louis Robert, an agronomist in Quebec, was fired after releasing research about the limited effectiveness of neonicotinoid pesticides. After a year of asking his superiors at the Ministry of Agriculture to release the report, Robert sent the unpublished research to Radio Canada. The study found that neonicotinoid seed treatments produced no significant difference in crop yields for corn and soybeans. Shortly after he released the report to the press, he was summoned to his office. “My boss was there, and on the video was his boss in Quebec City, and they handed me a letter signed by my ministry,” Robert said. “I was suspended from the department.” The study is here.
US: Berkeley’s campus is 95% organically managed without herbicides
UC Berkeley manages 95% of its campus organically and works with students to hold regular weeding days where students help pull weeds in areas that otherwise would have been sprayed with herbicide.