Supreme Court rules Roundup maker immune to state failure-to-warn suits

The Supreme Court issued a 7-2 ruling that Bayer AG, the owner of the Roundup weedkiller, is shielded from state-court lawsuits alleging the product failed to warn users of cancer risks. The justices based the decision on federal pesticide regulations, which have not required a cancer warning label for glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup.

Bayer said the judgment provides “regulatory clarity for innovation” and is expected to lead to the dismissal of pending failure-to-warn cases, while the company continues to pursue a proposed $7.25 billion class-action settlement to address other claims.

Attorney Christopher Seeger, representing some claimants, criticized the ruling, stating that it “wrongly slams the courthouse door on Americans sickened by pesticides,” though he noted the settlement could still provide compensation to some plaintiffs.

The case originated from Missouri resident John Durnell, who was awarded $1.25 million after a jury found Bayer failed to warn him about the risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma following decades of using Roundup in his community. The decision does not preclude lawsuits over product design, according to Durnell’s attorney Ashley Keller.

Regulatory agencies remain divided on glyphosate’s carcinogenicity: the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified it as “probably carcinogenic” in 2015, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has concluded it is unlikely to cause cancer when used as directed. Bayer argues it must follow the EPA’s labeling standards rather than state laws.

Approximately 200,000 Roundup-related claims have been filed, primarily by residential users. Bayer has halted the sale of glyphosate-based Roundup for U.S. home-lawn applications and has indicated it may consider withdrawing the chemical from agricultural markets if litigation persists.