Story perspectives

Supreme Court Hears Bayer Roundup Verdict Appeal, Liability Shield Fight

4/28/2026

Summary

Story summary

The Supreme Court heard arguments on Bayer’s appeal of a Missouri $1.25 million verdict alleging Roundup caused cancer.
Justice Department lawyer Sarah Harris argued that the Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act preempts state claims, while House Agriculture Committee Chair G.T. Thompson said the farm-bill language preserves EPA label changes.
MAHA activist Kelly Ryerson called the provision a liability shield, criticized the administration’s support for Bayer, and cited Bayer’s $7.25 billion settlement offer.

History

Historical Context

In the early 1990s, a coalition sued over the Delaney Clause and a 1995 EPA plan to ban 80 pesticides, prompting Congress to revamp pesticide regulation. The Food Quality Protection Act, signed on August 3 1996, gave the EPA a health-based standard and preempted many state actions. Today the EPA, Bayer and Agriculture Committee leaders dispute how that preemption applies to a Missouri Roundup verdict.

1 of 2

Story summary

The Supreme Court heard arguments on Bayer’s appeal of a Missouri $1.25 million verdict alleging Roundup caused cancer.
Justice Department lawyer Sarah Harris argued that the Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act preempts state claims, while House Agriculture Committee Chair G.T. Thompson said the farm-bill language preserves EPA label changes.
MAHA activist Kelly Ryerson called the provision a liability shield, criticized the administration’s support for Bayer, and cited Bayer’s $7.25 billion settlement offer.

1 / 2