.png?t=1751548316&width=1000)
As Bayer looks to contain the damage caused by thousands of lawsuits filed over the alleged health effects of Roundup, the U.S. Supreme Court asked the Solicitor General to weigh in on a filing before the court.
This follows a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Bayer subsidiary Monsanto in the Durnell case in April. Current Solicitor General D. John Sauer, appointed by President Trump, successfully argued in the Supreme Court that Trump was entitled to broad immunity from prosecution.
Durnell is the first case for which Monsanto has sought Supreme Court review since the Schaffner decision created a split among the federal circuit courts.
Essentially, SCOTUS is asking for the government's perspective on whether federal pesticide law, including FIFRA, preempts state-level lawsuits alleging failure to warn about the product's potential health risks. This request follows a lower court ruling that sided with a plaintiff who claimed Roundup caused his cancer.
“We see this request as an encouraging step and look forward to hearing the views of the government on FIFRA’s federal preemption provision, which relies on language common to several federal laws that cover a number of industries,” said Bayer CEO Bill Anderson in a statement.
“The security and affordability of the food supply depend on companies’ and farmers’ ability to rely on decisions made by responsible federal regulatory authorities. When courts permit companies to be punished under state law for following federal law, it makes companies like ours a prime target of the litigation industry and threatens farmers and innovations that patients and consumers need for their nutrition and health.”
This isn’t the first time a Solicitor General — the fourth-highest ranking official in the Justice Department — has been asked to weigh in on a Monsanto lawsuit. In 2022, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar played a role in several cases involving Monsanto and Roundup litigation.
Bayer says it expects a decision on its petition during the beginning of the 2025-26 court session and the company is pushing to “significantly contain the litigation” by the end of 2026.
In October 2023, Durnell was tried in Missouri Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis and the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The jury found the company failed to warn of the product’s risk and awarded $1.2 million to the plaintiff, but it rejected all other claims and declined to award punitive damages.
Monsanto appealed in and the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District upheld the verdict in February. Monsanto filed a writ to transfer the case to the Missouri Supreme Court, which was declined, so a SCOTUS review was requested.
In its Supreme Court petition, Bayer argues a split among federal circuit courts in Roundup litigation warrants review and resolution by SCOTUS.
The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously held in the Schaffner case that the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIRFA) expressly preempted the plaintiff’s state claims based on failure-to-warn theories.
The 9th and 11th Circuits, and Missouri’s intermediate appellate court in the Durnell case, reached different conclusions on the preemption question and the petition argues both state and federal courts require guidance that only SCOTUS can provide.
Bayer says if the Supreme Court accepts the case, a decision on the merits could still happen during before the next session ends in June 2026.
In a recent brief, lawyers for Monsanto laid out litigious environment that continues with Roundup.
As of June, there are approximately 60,000 pending cases over Roundup, and lawyers said, “the mounting liability will force Monsanto to confront whether to remove Roundup completely from the U.S. market, which would be a disaster for the nation’s farmers and food supply.”
Glyphosate is estimated to be used on over 300 million acres of U.S. farmland, and Bayer says removing it from the market would drive up food prices and force farmers into “back breaking labor” that Roundup helped eliminate when it was introduced. Alternative pesticides farmers might rely on could also have environmental risks, lawyers argue.
Bayer noted that in recent weeks, 18 organizations and coalitions, representing agriculture, legal thought leaders, U.S. manufacturers, scientific communities and business leaders filed amicus briefs urging the Supreme Court to grant Monsanto's petition.
Bayer said it has “obtained favorable outcomes in 17 of the last 25 trials and will continue to try cases based on the overwhelming scientific support for glyphosate’s safety. It will also consider resolving claims by settlements if the terms are in Monsanto’s strategic interest.”
The company is considering other options, Anderson said, including state and federal executive branch actions consistent with current FIFRA policy on pre-emption, and limiting or ending the sale of glyphosate-based products.
Anderson said the company also continues to, “assess other options that would help protect the company and its other products from the financial threats posed by the litigation industry and its ceaseless attacks on glyphosate-based products.”
