22
Aug
Broad Coalition Calls on Congress To Reject Fast-Moving Legislation To Shield Chemical Companies from Liability
(Beyond Pesticides, August 22, 2025) Legislative language moving through Congress—intended to prevent farmers, consumers, and workers from holding pesticide manufacturers accountable for the harm caused by their toxic products—is being opposed by a broad coalition of farmers, beekeepers, consumers, environmentalists, and workers with the release today of a joint statement opposing a dramatic change in a fundamental legal right. The document, Protect the Right of Farmers, Consumers, and Workers to Hold Pesticide Companies Accountable for Their Harmful Products, is joined by 51 organizations, coalitions, businesses, and leaders representing tens of thousands of members and communities. The legislation at issue is hidden in a provision of the Appropriations bill (Section 453) that has passed through the Appropriations Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives and is headed for a vote of the full House in the next couple of weeks, followed by the U.S. Senate.
The Appropriations provision is being pushed by chemical companies in the wake of extraordinary jury verdicts against Bayer/Monsanto, amounting to billions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages, for “failure-to-warn†liability claims involving glyphosate (Roundupᵀᴹ) weed killer products. The pesticide has been classified as cancer-causing by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (a part of the World Health Organization).
As stated in the joint document, the coalition’s goal is to uphold the right of farmers, consumers, and workers to hold pesticide manufacturers responsible for their failure to warn about the harm caused by their products. The coalition is calling on Congress to:
- REJECT the provision, section 453, adopted in the House Interior-EPA Appropriations and full Appropriations Committee, in the final House bill;
- REJECT The language of section 453 being attached to the Senate Appropriations bill; and
- REJECT section 453 language from being incorporated in the final Appropriations bill.
The joint document focuses on five elements that are identified as critical to the protection of public health and safety in a climate of deregulation and reductions in federal funding for environmental and related programs. These include:
- Legacy. The courts have long served as a venue for farmers, consumers, and workers to hold chemical manufacturers accountable for their failure to warn about the hazards of their products, including potential chronic adverse health outcomes, on the product label.
- Label. EPA pesticide product labels are not required to display long-term effects like cancer and reproductive problems that are linked to exposure.
- Legal. Section 453 in the House Appropriations bill would, in the future, prohibit cases like those filed by those harmed by glyphosate (Roundup™), who have won jury verdicts and compensation.
- Lasting. The House bill language removes the incentive for chemical manufacturers, under threat of compensatory and punitive damages, to develop safer products or remove products altogether — slowing the critically necessary shift to effective, less- and non-toxic land and building management practices and products to protect health and the environment.
- Law. Legislative history added to the bill in the committee will do little to ensure a fully functioning EPA and court redress.
A Broad Movement
“With the massive dismantling of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) programs by the current administration, Congress has been seeking, through Appropriations bill provisions, to limit court oversight, which in many cases serves as the only backstop for public health and environmental protections,†said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides.
“The challenges facing farmworkers are profound; from exposure to limited protections, our communities are already at the margins, with women and children shouldering the most severe impacts of forced pesticide contact,†said Mily Trevino-Sauceda, executive director of Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, “This legislation would reduce their access to justice with this inhumane introduction of pesticide immunity shield language. There is no victory in harming the very workforce that feeds this nation.â€
“Once you understand the pesticide registration process, the need to hold registrants accountable becomes very apparent,†said Richard Coy, third-generation commercial beekeeper and vice president of Coy’s Honey Farm, Inc. “In my opinion, legislation that impedes accountability is bad policy.â€
“EPA pesticide product labels are often inadequate or inaccurate. Yet this dangerous legislation would shield pesticide companies from accountability for any harm their chemicals may inflict,†said Diane Rosenberg, president of Iowa Alliance for Responsible Agriculture and Jefferson County Farmers and Neighbors. “This is flat out wrong. Congress should protect vulnerable farmers, not multibillion-dollar chemical companies.â€
“Farmers and consumers have long had venues, like courts, to hold chemical manufacturers accountable for their failure to warn about the health harms of their products. State laws have also historically been able to help protect the health of farmers, farmworkers, and consumers from health-harming pesticides,†said Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environment’s (ANHE) executive director, Katie Huffling, DNP, RN, CNM, FAAN. “We urge Congress to both develop and maintain a system that truly protects farmers, farmworkers, and consumers; a system that holds pesticide manufacturers responsible for their failure to warn about the harm caused by their products and a system that supports the development of safe and effective, less- and non-toxic products to protect health and the environment.â€
“As Missourians, we see industry’s influence everywhere—on our highways, in our mailboxes, and on our screens—reminders of how aggressively they shape public opinion and policy,†said Ethan Duke, co-founder and co-director of Missouri River Bird Observatory. “At the Observatory, we’ve seen efforts like Section 453 have consequences for the welfare of our fields, waterways, and bird populations. Section 453 would silence communities and strip away one of the few tools people have to hold industry accountable for the harm they cause to both human health and the natural world.â€
“Farmworkers are on the front line of pesticide exposure,†says Jeannie Economos, coordinator of the Pesticide Safety and Environmental Health Project at Farmworker Association of Florida. “In my 30 years of working with farmworkers, I have heard heartbreaking stories of health effects that farmworkers, their children, and/or their families have experienced. Farmworkers deserve fair treatment and justice!â€
This groundswell of support emerges from a diverse range of voices, including environmental, conservation, climate, public health, and biodiversity groups, and includes farmers, beekeepers, businesses, medical professionals, farmworkers, farmers, and community-based groups. “We also know that there are significant disproportionate impacts that women and children face, not to mention farmworkers, agricultural, rural, working-class, and majority Black Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) communities, as documented in the scientific literature,†said Max Sano, Beyond Pesticides’ senior policy and coalitions associate.
Implications If Section 453 Passes
Bayer/Monsanto and the chemical and agribusiness group Modern Ag Alliance are leading the charge on efforts in Congress and state legislatures across the country to create immunity from failure to warn litigation. In this context, the chemical industry has successfully lobbied for what environmentalists and legal experts have called a weak federal pesticide law (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act—FIFRA), and then argues in court when sued for damages that their products are in compliance with pesticide registration standards and therefore they are protected from litigation. Juries have ruled that chemical manufacturers failed to provide adequate warning through their product labeling, given the independent peer-reviewed science, including what the company knew or should have known, and a clinical assessment of the harm caused to the plaintiff.
Under the Appropriations language moving through Congress, the only permitted EPA-approved label language must be consistent with a human health assessment or carcinogenicity classification previously approved by EPA—freezing in place EPA’s position on a pesticide for possibly decades, and eliminating the ability to hold chemical manufacturers accountable for damages. The bill language states: “None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to issue or adopt any guidance or any policy, take any regulatory action…†without conducting an entirely new assessment—which takes “no less than four years, and sometimes over 12,†according to EPA. [The bill language is found here. Search on Section 453.] Under this provision, industry will argue that they, as registrants of pesticide ingredients, are unable to disclose potential harms that are different from the EPA-approved label. The industry is also pushing to amend the Farm Bill with similar language that shields chemical manufacturers from lawsuits on the harm caused by their products.
Signatories represent all 50 states and the District of Columbia, including the following:
Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments (ANHE), Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, American Bird Conservancy (ABC), American Sustainable Business Network (ASBN), Bee Squared Apiaries, Beyond Pesticides, Beyond Toxics, Californians for Pesticide Reform, Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Center for Environmental Health (CEH), Center for Farmworker Families (CFF), Center for Food Safety (CFS), Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), Center for Progressive Reform (CPR), Children’s Environmental Health Network (CEHN), Clean Air Action Network of Glens Falls (CAAN), Clean Water Action, Coming Clean Network, Coy’s Honey Farm Inc., CT Pesticide Reform, Farmworker Association of Florida (FWAF), Farmworker Self-Help, Friends of the Earth (FOE), Green America, Iowa Alliance for Responsible Agriculture (IARA), Jefferson County Farmers and Neighbors, Inc. (JFAN), Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA), Maryland Ornithological Society, Maryland Pesticide Education Network (MPEN), Maryland Votes for Animals, Missouri Coalition for the Environment (MCE), Missouri River Bird Observatory (MBRO), Montana Environmental Information Center (MEIC), Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Association (NODPA), Northeast Organic Farming Association of Massachusetts (NOFA-Mass), NOFA-NJ, NOFA-NY, NOFA-VT, Norwalk River Watershed Association (NRWA), Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP), Organic Consumers Association (OCA), People & Pollinators Action Network (P&PAN), Pesticide Action and Agroecology Network (PANNA), People Organized in Defense of Earth and Her Resources (PODER), Pollinate Minnesota, Pollinator Pathway, Pollinator Stewardship Council (PSC), Rachel Carson Council (RCC), Re:Wild Your Campus, Toxic Free North Carolina (TFNC), Valley Improvement Projects (VIP).
Additional Calls to Action
To stay informed on the latest updates on Congress, scientific literature, and our other programmatic areas, consider signing up for Action of the Week and Weekly News Update. You can see all of Beyond Pesticides Resources compiling decades of research, analysis, and models for systemic change into actionable hubs.
U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) introduced the Pesticide Injury Accountability Act (S. 2324) earlier this summer, amending FIFRA to create a federal right of action for anyone who is harmed by a toxic pesticide. The public can take action to generate support for this legislation.
All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.
Source: Fact Sheet – Protect the Right of Farmers, Consumers, and Workers to Hold Pesticide Corporations Accountable; Fact Sheet – Endorsing Organizations
