On March 21, a jury in a Georgia courtroom awarded John Barnes $2.1 billion in damages, affirming his declare that utilizing Roundup brought on his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and that the corporate that made the product ought to have warned him of the danger.
It was one in every of about 177,000 lawsuits to date filed in opposition to Bayer, which acquired Monsanto, the maker of the world’s most generally used weedkiller, in 2018. The corporate has put aside $16 billion to deal with the litigation, and this case appeared like one other main loss.
Quite the opposite, it could be the final Roundup litigation case within the state.
The week prior, Georgia’s state lawmakers passed a bill that might shield pesticide producers from the identical type of authorized legal responsibility sooner or later. It’s now awaiting Republican Governor Brian Kemp’s signature.
If the invoice turns into legislation, it should mark a turning level in Bayer’s lengthy search to find the right strategy to beat again the lawsuits claiming that Roundup causes most cancers. Bayer maintains that Roundup and its lively ingredient, glyphosate, are safe when used as directed, and the U.S. Environmental Safety Company (EPA) has repeatedly found it isn’t more likely to trigger most cancers.
“The actual fact these chemical firms need immunity from the hurt that their pesticides could have on a person or many people, it’s simply not honest.”
International health agencies and a number of juries, presented with scientific analysis and paperwork that present Monsanto labored to cover proof of hurt, have reached totally different conclusions, affirming its connection to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Along with many different approaches to mitigate the price of litigation, the agrichemical large first started writing and lobbying for the passage of “pesticide immunity” legal guidelines in a handful of states last year.
The legal guidelines eradicate people’ means to carry “failure-to-warn” claims, which most Roundup litigation has been based mostly on thus far. Basically, these legal guidelines declare that if the EPA has accredited a chemical as secure, firms can’t be held responsible for failing to warn customers of dangers. Opponents level out that the EPA’s approvals don’t at all times sustain with rising dangers. Chlorpyrifos and atrazine, for instance, have remained in use with EPA approval regardless of identified dangers.
Final 12 months, Bayer lobbied lawmakers in Iowa, Idaho, and Missouri to push immunity payments, however the payments didn’t cross. The corporate then ramped up its marketing campaign heading into 2025. It created the Modern Ag Alliance to advertise farmer help for the payments and started a cross-country advert blitz. Because the starting of this 12 months, lawmakers have launched related immunity payments in a couple of dozen states. Payments had been defeated in Montana, Mississippi, and Wyoming and are nonetheless pending in Idaho, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Missouri, Florida, Tennessee, and Iowa.
“Individuals who know concerning the invoice are against the invoice and actually don’t need their rights curtailed. We don’t must have the Iowa legislature making this determination on behalf of Bayer,” mentioned Jennifer Breon, an organizer at advocacy group Meals & Water Watch who has been coordinating opposition to the Iowa invoice. “In the event that they really feel that their most cancers or no matter sickness has been brought on through the use of a pesticide, individuals ought to have an opportunity to make that case in courtroom.”
Whereas motion continues within the states, Bayer is actively supporting two present pathways to federal legislation adjustments that might obtain the same consequence: The primary is a petition submitted by the attorneys normal of 11 Republican-led states asking the EPA to provoke a rulemaking course of that might additional affirm the EPA’s authority on pesticide labeling. The second, a bit of legislation referred to as the Agricultural Labeling Uniformity Act, could possibly be hooked up to a future farm invoice.
There may be additionally a wild-card issue within the combine: Whereas Republicans have principally supported Bayer’s efforts prior to now, Secretary of Well being and Human Companies Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was the lawyer who received the primary verdict in opposition to Monsanto (now Bayer) based mostly on claims Roundup brought on Dewayne “Lee” Johnson’s cancer. And a few of Kennedy’s Make America Wholesome Once more (MAHA) followers have been speaking out against the payments.
Bayer didn’t reply to questions from Civil Eats by press time.
Trending Merchandise
