Supreme Court Hears Roundup Warning Liability Fight Monday

The Supreme Court’s ruling could affect pesticide warning claims well beyond Roundup. Richard Gupton with the Ag Retailers Association joins us to explain the importance of federal pesticide labeling standards and discuss the potential impact on the ag industry and supply chain.

NASHVILLE, TENN. (RFD NEWS) — The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Monday in a case that could affect pesticide lawsuits across agriculture. Brigit Rollins with the National Agricultural Law Center said the ruling could shape how failure-to-warn claims are handled for Roundup and other crop protection products.

In the case Durnell v. Monsanto, a Missouri man claims Roundup exposure caused his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. A jury awarded him $1.25 million, and Missouri courts allowed that verdict to stand.

Bayer, which owns Monsanto, argues the case should be blocked by federal law. The company says FIFRA gives the EPA authority over pesticide labeling and that states cannot impose warning requirements that differ from federal standards.

Farm-Level Takeaway: The Supreme Court’s ruling could affect pesticide warning claims well beyond Roundup.
Tony St. James, RFD News Markets Speicialist

The plaintiff argues his claim can still move forward. He says federal law already bars misbranding and that his case also points to older marketing materials that described Roundup as safe.

The outcome could extend well beyond a single product. The Court’s decision may influence thousands of pending cases and help define how far federal pesticide law reaches when state courts hear product-warning disputes.

The Supreme Court is preparing to hear arguments in a case centered around the herbicide Roundup, one of thousands of lawsuits filed over the past decade, with a decision that could impact all crop protection products. Richard Gupton with the Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) joined us on Monday’s Market Day Report to provide insight into the case and its potential broader implications on the agriculture industry as whole.

In his interview with RFD News, Gupton explained the crux of the case and discussed how the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act has governed pesticide labeling and use for decades, emphasizing the importance of uniform labeling standards. He also addressed how the case before the Supreme Court could impact that system and what could happen if national uniformity were to end.

Finally, Gupton outlined potential ripple effects across the ag supply chain and shared his outlook for the case going forward, including what the industry should consider ahead of the Court’s decision.

Tony St. James joined the RFD-TV talent team in August 2024, bringing a wealth of experience and a fresh perspective to RFD-TV and Rural Radio Channel 147 Sirius XM. In addition to his role as Market Specialist (collaborating with Scott “The Cow Guy” Shellady to provide radio and TV audiences with the latest updates on ag commodity markets), he hosts “Rural America Live” and serves as talent for trade shows.

LATEST STORIES BY THIS AUTHOR:

Farmland values remain stable, but weakened credit conditions and lower expected farm income signal tighter financial margins heading into 2026.
Bangladesh recently pledged to purchase 700,000 tons of U.S. wheat and has also become a new buyer of American soybeans.
The White House is now preparing to restore an Endangered Species Act (ESA) rule from the first Trump Administration.
Ethanol exports are expanding on strong demand from Canada and Europe, while DDGS shipments remain broad-based and supportive for feed markets.
University of Nebraska President Dr. Jeffrey Gold joined RFD-TV to provide the latest insights on diabetes and rural health.
Mary-Thomas Hart, with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, discusses the latest WOTUS developments and their implications for agriculture.