NASHVILLE, Tenn. (RFD-TV) — The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2022 decision to register the herbicides Enlist One and Enlist Duo through 2029 is now under direct legal attack, with environmental groups asking a federal court to revoke both labels entirely. The lawsuit argues that EPA failed to meet the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act standard requiring pesticides to avoid “unreasonable adverse effects” on the environment.
If the court sides with plaintiffs, both Enlist products — widely used on 2,4-D-resistant corn, soybeans, and cotton across 34 states — could come off the market.
According to Brigit Rollins, a Staff Attorney with the National Agricultural Law Center, the challenge centers on three allegations: that EPA understated environmental costs, overstated weed-control benefits, and relied on ineffective mitigation measures.
Plaintiffs say EPA used outdated 2018–2019 usage data and ignored the rapid expansion of Enlist technologies. They also argue EPA overstated Enlist’s role in managing resistant weeds, claiming many farmers rely on Enlist alone rather than pairing it with additional chemistries. They further contend that EPA’s new mitigation tools — including a 30-foot drift buffer and a point-based runoff “pick list” — are insufficient, noting research showing 2,4-D can drift farther and runoff controls may not require meaningful management changes.
A ruling to vacate the labels would immediately disrupt broadleaf weed management in major corn, soybean, and cotton states and could ripple through other crop protection products. Because Enlist One and Enlist Duo were among the first herbicides to receive EPA’s new mitigation language, the court’s decision will also shape how future labels apply drift and runoff safeguards.
A decision upholding EPA’s approach, however, would reinforce the agency’s newer mitigation tools and provide regulatory stability for similar products.
trade enforcement concerns.
