(Beyond Pesticides, May 4, 2026) Attention shifts to the U.S. Senate after the U.S. House of Representatives last week (April 30) passed a Farm Bill. In a bipartisan vote thought unthinkable just over a month ago when the House Agriculture Committee passed its Farm Bill, Democratic members of Congress, joined by 73 Republicans, stripped from the bill three chemical-industry authored provisions that would have severely weakened pesticide law on a vote of 280 to 142. The final bill, H.R. 7567—Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, which is unacceptable to farm, farmworker, food, and environmental advocates, passed the House on a vote of 224 to 200. (See here for the vote tally.) The Chair of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, Senator John Boozman (R-AR) pointed to the House bill as “bipartisan” and a “significant achievement.” Fourteen Democrats voted for the House bill and three Republicans voted against the legislation, which has been widely referred to as a Republican bill since it was written by Republican lawmakers without input from Democrats. It is not clear whether Sen. Boozman will move ahead with bipartisan negotiations on Senate Farm Bill language.   Beyond Pesticides, along with environmental, farm, farmworker, and consumer groups, is calling […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 30, 2026) On April 27, 2026, advocates—including Beyond Pesticides—from across the political spectrum came together in front of the U.S. Supreme Court to speak out against the chemical industry campaign, led by Bayer/Monsanto, the Trump administration, and Republican lawmakers, to shield chemical manufacturers from liability for failing to warn people who have been harmed by their pesticides. Their multi-pronged strategy targets the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Congress, and state legislatures. The question of the public’s right to sue chemical manufacturers that do not warn of product hazards was heard before the Supreme Court, as Monsanto argued that people who have been diagnosed with cancer after using the weed killer glyphosate should be prohibited from suing the company for failing to warn on the product label. The chemical manufacturer argued in Monsanto v. Durnell that federal registration of a pesticide preempts legal rights afforded to people under state law under U.S. federalism. The chemical industry is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse decades of jurisprudence and shield manufacturers from liability associated with those who are harmed but not warned about pesticide adverse effects like cancer, neurological or immunological conditions, reproductive dysfunction, and other chronic illnesses. Highlighted Quotes […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 2, 2026) In advance of opening U.S. Supreme Court arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell, Beyond Pesticides joined an amicus brief filed yesterday and led by Center for Food Safety (CFS), which challenges Bayer/Monsanto’s position that it should not be held liable for failing to warn consumers that the use of their pesticide products could cause cancer. The chemical company giant, along with the broader chemical and agribusiness industry, argues that they should be given immunity from litigation because their products are registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a claim that is disputed in detail in the amicus brief. Groups joining the brief include Consumer Federation of America, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP), Rural Coalition, Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, Center for Biological Diversity, Beyond Pesticides, and Food & Water Watch.  Click to access the 17 additional amicus briefs filed in support of the respondents: Stand for Health Freedom; The American Association for Justice and Public Justice; Children’s Health Defense; 36 State Legislators; The Local Government Legal Center, National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, and International Municipal Lawyers Association; Former EPA Officials and Environmental Protection Network; Philip Landrigan, MD, MSc, Lianne Sheppard, PhD, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 31, 2026) A statement decrying chemical company secrecy was released today by over 200 grassroots, health, farm, farmworker, environmental, and consumer groups, socially responsible corporations, over 340 citizens from 46 states, and international partners. The statement, released before the U.S. Supreme Court tomorrow reaches the final deadline for submission of amicus briefs in a case in which Bayer/Monsanto argues, with support of the Trump administration, that it should not be required to disclose on its product labels the potential hazards of its pesticide products. Oral arguments in the case will be heard on April 27, with a decision anticipated in June. Decades of law have upheld the legal argument that chemical companies are liable for their failure to warn users of their pesticides about the harm that they could cause. Bayer/Monsanto is attempting to reverse years of case law and billions of dollars in jury verdicts and future cases in which the company has been held liable for causing cancer but not warning product users. See statement, Stop Chemical Company Secrecy of Pesticide Product Hazards. Chemical Industry State Campaign The chemical industry last year launched a multi-pronged campaign to establish immunity from litigation by those who have […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2026) The Monsanto Company, founded in 1901 and acquired by the multinational corporation Bayer AG in 2018, submitted its opening brief to the Supreme Court of the U.S. (SCOTUS) last month, seeking liability immunity from lawsuits filed by product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards. The question before SCOTUS is: “Whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq., preempts a state-law failure-to-warn claim concerning a pesticide registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where EPA has determined that a particular warning is not required and the warning cannot be added to a product label without EPA approval.” If successful, the Court would be overturning (reversing) its 2005 decision in Bates v. Dow Agrosciences, 544 U.S. 431, which upheld EPA and state registration of pesticides as a floor of protection, without releasing manufacturers of the responsibility to warn for potential harm that is not required by EPA. Pesticide manufacturers propose the text for their product labels and EPA ensures compliance with its minimum requirements, which does not preclude them from disclosing potential adverse effects they know of or should have known. The Missouri case before the Supreme Court, Durnell v. Monsanto, on the cancer causing effects of the weed killer glyphosate (RoundupTM) resulted in a jury verdict (in 2023) of $1.25 million and the total number of jury verdicts and settlements may amount to over $10 billion in liability if […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 20, 2026) As pesticides’ adverse effects on human and ecosystem health stack up in the scientific literature, health and environmental groups are focused on striking an entire section of the Republican Farm Bill that will eliminate protections, which have been written into law for generations. The section is Section X, Subtitle C, Part 1 on “Regulatory Reform.” Threatened are policies intended to protect against the diseases and illnesses touching families and communities, including brain and nervous system disorders, birth abnormalities, cancer, developmental and learning disorders, immune and endocrine disruption, reproductive dysfunction, among others. Wildlife, including mammals, bees and other pollinators, fish and other aquatic organisms, birds, and the biota within soil, are adversely affected with reproductive, neurological, endocrine-disruptive, and developmental anomalies, and cancers. (See Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database.) With the urgent threat of a markup of the legislation scheduled to begin on March 3, attention shifted to a newly released Executive Order (EO) that could provide blanket legal protection for the manufacturer of the weed killer glyphosate, Bayer/Monsanto. By activating the Defense Production Act of 1950 and its immunity from lawsuits provision for glyphosate manufacturers, the administration could mandate production of glyphosate as a “national security” concern and provide […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 17, 2026) The Ranking Member of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN), issued a swift rebuke to the GOP 2026 Farm Bill text unveiled last Friday, saying it would be “’very difficult, if not impossible’ for her to back a GOP-led farm bill because it contains ‘poison pills’ and doesn’t do enough to aid struggling farmers,” according to Politico. She did not specifically point to the key controversial provisions that eliminate three core safeguards that are seen as critical to the health of farmers, consumers and the environment—judicial review of chemical manufacturers’ failure to warn about pesticide hazards, the democratic right of local governments in coordination with states to protect residents from pesticide use, and local site-specific action to ensure the safety of air, water, and land from pesticides. Beyond Pesticides responded with a nationwide action to Tell members of the U.S. House of Representatives to stop provisions in the Farm Bill that shield chemical companies from liability for the harm caused by their products, intrude on local communities’ democratic right to restrict pesticides, and eliminate pesticide restrictions governing clean water, environmental impacts, and endangered species; with a request to support […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 16, 2026) The chair of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, in releasing the Republican 2026 Farm Bill draft last Friday afternoon, is challenging three core safeguards that are seen as critical to the health of farmers, consumers and the environment—judicial review of chemical manufacturers’ failure to warn about pesticide hazards, the democratic right of local governments in coordination with states to protect residents from pesticide use, and local site-specific action to ensure the safety of air, water, and land from pesticides. The draft Farm bill language in three separate sections: (i) prohibits lawsuits by farmers and consumers harmed by pesticides for which manufacturers failed to provide complete safety warnings (Section 10205); (ii) takes away the authority of local governments to protect residents and the local environment from pesticide use (Section 10206), and; (iii) repeals requirements in numerous federal statutes to protect against local pesticide contamination that could affect waterways, drinking water, federal projects, endangered species, migratory birds, and toxic waste (Section 10207). Beyond Pesticides responded with a nationwide action to Tell members of the U.S. House of Representatives to stop provisions in the Farm Bill that shield chemical companies from liability for the harm caused […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 17, 2026) The public’s right to sue chemical manufacturers that do not warn of product hazards will be up for review by the U.S. Supreme Court later this year, the justices decided Friday. Bayer/Monsanto is challenging billions of dollars in jury verdicts, which affirm longstanding jurisprudence that holds manufacturers responsible for disclosing hazards even when not required to do so by regulatory authorities. In the case being challenged, Durnell, John L. v. Monsanto, the injured party successfully argued that a chemical manufacturer has a duty to warn of potential hazards on their product label even though the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not require the warning. The failure-to-warn in the Durnell case resulted in a jury verdict of $1.25 million, and the total number of jury verdicts and settlements on similar cases may amount to over $10 billion in liability if the Supreme Court upholds the lower courts and hundreds of thousands of other plaintiffs with the same claim. The cases involve exposure to the weed killer glyphosate (RoundupTM, which is the most widely used herbicide in the U.S. and worldwide, has been classified as posing a possible risk of cancer by the International Agency for […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 7, 2026) Chemical manufacturers may have suffered a short-lived setback in their quest for statutory immunity from lawsuits due to their failure to warn those harmed by their products, but their campaign in Congress, state legislatures across the country, and the U.S. Supreme Court is continuing. On Monday, January 6, it was announced that a provision denying people the right to sue chemical companies for nondisclosure of product hazards had been dropped from the FY2026 funding bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. This summer, a provision passed by the House Appropriations Committee would have denied farmers, farmworkers, landscapers, gardeners, and consumers generally the right to sue companies that do not disclose on their product labels and in marketing information potential hazards associated with their products’ use. “With the announcement that appropriations legislation moving through Congress does not contain a provision that would shield chemical manufacturers from lawsuits for their failure to warn those harmed by their products, we stress that the industry’s campaign to escape accountability is proceeding with a fierce determination,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. The chemical industry, spearheaded by the chemical giant Bayer/Monsanto, in the last year has waged an […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 11, 2025) In an amicus brief published on December 1, 2025, the Office of the Solicitor General (SG) and the White House are calling on the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to grant certiorari on Bayer’s petition to shield chemical companies that fail to warn people about the potential hazards of their pesticide products. The U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer (former Solicitor General of Missouri, home to Bayer-Monsanto’s U.S. headquarters), in siding with the Germany-based, multinational pesticide corporation, calls for SCOTUS to take on the case, which could lead to a prohibition on state-level failure-to-warn claims based on the arguments laid out in the amicus brief. This move sets the stage for SCOTUS to undermine the main legal argument used to hold pesticide corporations accountable for their harmful products, sending Bayer’s stock price to skyrocket 12 percentage points between December 2 and December 3 after the decision was made public. As of May 2025, Bayer has already paid at least 10 billion dollars in jury verdicts and settlements to cancer victims who have attributed their diagnoses to the use of Bayer/Monsanto’s glyphosate-based Roundup weed killer products, according to Lawsuit Information Center. Two previous petitions […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 12, 2025) A ballot initiative to repeal a local ordinance in Maine that bans most uses of lawn chemicals was rejected by the voters last week by a 10-point margin. The voters of Falmouth, Maine, 55% to 45%, upheld an updated ordinance that was passed by the town council in February 2025 to protect the community’s health and the coastal environment from petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers, sending a strong message that ecological land management in conformance with organic standards is the responsible path, given pesticide-related health threats, biodiversity decline, and the climate crisis. The ordinance being challenged by the ballot initiative updated a 2020 rule with more stringent criteria and restrictions and the goal of ensuring a holistic approach to land management. Maine has become the bellwether nationwide for communities seeking to eliminate the use of petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers on public and private property, including parks, playing fields, open spaces, and yards. When applied, pesticides move off the target site through drift, volatilization, runoff, and leaching, creating community-wide poisoning and contamination. However, unlike Maine and five other states, most state laws preempt local jurisdictions from restricting pesticides. These states have adopted preemption language at the behest […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 9, 2025) SprayDays California, the pesticide notification and mapping tool run by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), was updated in late August after public backlash (including from farmworkers), which identified inadequate notice of pesticide use to those who work in or live in proximity to agricultural fields. According to a DPR press release from August 28, these changes include attempts to bring down barriers for users so that, in the words of DPR Director Karen Morrison, the department can “provide Californians with access to information and services.” While public health advocates view notification as a step that may allow people to leave a treatment area or take shelter to reduce exposure, groups continue to express concerns about a focus on notification to the exclusion of addressing the root causes of exposure—chemical-intensive agriculture, despite the viability of organic compatible practices and products. The groups criticize the continuous registration of pesticide active ingredients and product formulations without considering widely available practices and nonchemical and nature-based alternatives to pest management. These include regenerative organic principles and practices that draw inspiration from Indigenous land management and agroecological systems that have thrived in coexistence with nature. Recent Updates There are […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 2, 2025) It did not go without notice to U.S. grassroots environmental and public health advocates that earlier this month, over two million people in France signed a “first of its kind” petition that ultimately prevented the overturning of the country’s ban on bee-killing neonicotinoid insecticides. The action was widely covered in France, including in Le Monde. This uprising, organized by 23-year-old French master’s student Eleonore Pattery, emphasizes the importance of individuals in communities mobilizing people to protect the planet from pesticides that are having a devastating adverse effect on health and the environment. The grassroots push in France taps into a deep public concern about health and the environment that is emblematic of the level of public engagement needed to thwart the high level of chemical industry, agribusiness, and allied corporate influence that undermines basic protections. Industry interests have long been embedded in federal environmental and public health laws. For example, federal and state pesticide laws (the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and similar state laws) allow widespread exposure to toxic chemicals despite the availability of nontoxic alternatives that are both efficacious and cost-effective. Without public engagement, as seen in France, significant improvements in law are constantly […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 27, 2025) A study published in European Journal of Agronomy finds that “organic farming equals conventional yield under irrigation and enhances seed quality in drought, aiding food security.” For decades, organic advocates have heard from defenders of chemical-intensive agriculture that organic farming is not commercially attainable for widespread adoption and cannot compete on productivity and profitability at a commercial scale. At the same time, chemical manufacturers, chemical-dependent farmers, and their allies greenwash their products (e.g., active ingredients, full formulations, and pesticide-treated seeds) and practices by insisting in regulatory comments, contract science studies, and lobbying campaigns that they are necessary for climate-smart, sustainable, regenerative, and/or integrated pest management agriculture and land management. In this context, the chemical industry alliance is now pushing deregulation, preemption of state and local authority to restrict pesticides, and immunity from lawsuits for the harm caused by their products and practices. An expansive coalition of farmers, farmworkers, conservationists, medical professionals, Indigenous communities, and environmental and public health advocates is fighting back, including Beyond Pesticides. Background and Methodology The researchers tested twelve common bean genotypes of Phaselous vulgaris L., with eight local [Basque Country] landraces (defined by Oxford Language as “a local cultivar [plant] or […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 8, 2025) In a study published in Environmental Pollution, researchers have detected eighty pesticides (35 insecticides, 29 fungicides, and 11 herbicides, and metabolites) in the ambient air of a rural region of Spain (Valencia) between 2007 and 2024. Despite these dramatic findings, the authors conclude that there is “no [observable] cancer risk,” “no inhalation risk for adults,” and only one pesticide concentration (the insecticide chlorpyrifos) showing “a potential risk to toddlers.” However, the authors did not conduct an aggregate risk assessment that would typically consider all routes of exposure to the individual pesticides detected, including through water, food, and landscapes. Not considered by the authors are the potential effects of pesticide mixtures and full pesticide product formulations (with all potentially toxic ingredients), also a deficiency in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registration of pesticides under federal law. Of concern, as well, are other contaminants in pesticide products, including but not limited to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), heavy metals, plastics (including microplastics), which contribute to chronic diseases and health risks, and adverse effects to ecosystem stability exacerbated by the climate crisis. Background and Methodology “This work aims to conduct a further study on the situation of […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 23, 2025) The pesticide manufacturer Syngenta has settled several lawsuits in federal courts in Pennsylvania and Illinois in recent months and is seeking a global settlement with over 6,000 litigants in order to avoid nationwide trials linking their weed killer paraquat to Parkinson’s Disease, according to reporting by The New Lede and The Guardian, respectively. Internal Syngenta documents released by these news outlets in a report dubbed The Paraquat Papers indicate that the company was aware of scientific evidence linking paraquat to Parkinson’s and attempted to quash research efforts to disclose the evidence.   These lawsuits were filed on behalf of former farmers and agricultural workers who went on to be diagnosed with neurological disorders, including Parkinson’s Disease, after using paraquat-based herbicide products for long periods of time. This litigation comes at a time when pesticide manufacturers across the board are facing increased scrutiny and subsequent financial repercussions. Simultaneously, their allies in Congress are revamping their efforts to shield chemical manufacturers from “failure to warn” lawsuits and establish federal preemption of local state governments’ ability to regulate pesticides more stringently than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Many of the paraquat lawsuits in federal courts, known as multidistrict […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 7, 2025) At the end of the Independence Day weekend and after the Congressional passage of reconciliation bill (H.R. 1) on July 3, ongoing legislative proposals challenge the underlying principles of the  Declaration of Independence—raising serious environmental and public health concerns and issues of democratic governance by local and state governments to ensure protections. A new NPR/PBS News/Marist poll finds that three-quarters of Americans say democracy is under serious threat. The Declaration not only presented the case of the colonists for independence from Britain, it also created a framework for defining democracy, beginning with the statement, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” and it continues “necessary for the public good.” Above all, the Declaration’s statement of the equal rights of all citizens supports the need for environmental justice.  Among the grievances listed are the King’s restriction of the power of local (colonial) authorities to pass laws, “the most wholesome and necessary for the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 3-4, 2025) On this Independence Day, Beyond Pesticides calls for holistic solutions that, as articulated in the Declaration of Independence, move the nation to ensure “certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” The founders of the United States were aware of the existential threat of corruption to democratic institutions. Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury, warned in Federalist No. 68 of The Federalist Papers that the presidency could be overtaken by a despotic figure without adequate safeguards. James Madison, the fourth president of the United States, in Federalist No. 10 speaks to the danger that factions—defined as a group of people or entities “… who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community”—impose on the general public, if not checked by safeguards in the country’s political system. The foundational principles in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution have been challenged under the current administration and in the U.S. Congress. Communities are facing a fourfold attack on these principles and the centuries-old promise of the nation: […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 10, 2025) An industry-led campaign to quash lawsuits against chemical manufacturers because of their “failure to warn” about the hazards of their pesticide products has failed to move forward in nine state legislatures with significant GOP majorities (Iowa, Missouri, Idaho, Florida, Tennessee, Mississippi, Wyoming, Montana, and Oklahoma). As the Making America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission released its first report to assess the root causes of childhood diseases and adverse health conditions, there continues to be an ongoing fight among forces within the Trump Administration on whether pesticides should even be mentioned. (See here for The New York Times coverage.) As federal funding cuts make their way through the Budget Reconciliation process, communities around the country are calling on their elected officials to protect their right to sue pesticide manufacturers with failure-to-warn claims; in an era of deregulation and ongoing failure of our regulatory agencies to assess potential associated harms, advocates demand the preservation of this legal right.  Status Report on State-Level Legislation  The only state that has active legislation, as of today’s writing, is North Carolina. The failure-to-warn language was inserted into the annual state Farm Bill package (SB 639) in Section 19, leading to public outcry in the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 22, 2025) A medical study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) finds that “living within 1 mile of a golf course was associated with 126% increased odds of developing PD [Parkinson’s Disease] compared with individuals living more than 6 miles away from a golf course.” While organic land management offers a simple solution, current pesticide restrictions do not address chronic neurological diseases such as Parkinson’s Disease, which are linked to pesticide exposure. It has become increasingly clear that viable and cost-effective land management practices, including for golf course management, are critical to the protection of community health. Yet, the federal regulatory agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), do not conduct an alternative practices assessment as part of their review process to determine whether the risks are “reasonable” (statutory language) or the risk assessments accept an unnecessary hazard. The complexity of pesticide exposure, which includes mixtures of multiple chemicals and undisclosed hazardous “inert” ingredients, raises broad questions about the threats to public health as well as biodiversity. See a recent Action of the Week, FDA Must Establish Tolerances for Pesticides Used in Mixtures, to see […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 20, 2025) In the same week, Republicans on the House Agriculture Committee in a straight party-line vote moved forward a proposal to gut U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) supplemental food program for low-income people, and USDA reversed course after the filing of a federal lawsuit spearheaded by farmers and environmentalists argued that the agency had illegally deleted climate data from its website in violation of several federal statutes. (See New York Times reporting here.) The Republican budget proposal (see full text here) for the next fiscal year, which will strip $300 billion in USDA funding, is proposed in President Trump’s “skinny budget” proposal. Throughout the past few months of uncertainty, a robust coalition of farmers, farmworkers, businesses, lawyers, public health professionals, and environmentalists has continued to fight for holistic food systems reform and protection of organic standards. Budget Reconciliation and Preemption Review The House GOP met for markups on May 12-13 to approve the agricultural portion of the proposed Reconciliation package before a full vote on May 16. The legislative language, passed along party-lines [29-25] in the agriculture committee, is considered “the largest overhaul in decades to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which helps more than […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 1, 2025) With the second largest award of nearly $2.1 billion (see reporting on largest), a jury in Georgia state court on March 21 found the pesticide manufacturer Bayer/Monsanto guilty of causing a man’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after use of the company’s glyphosate-based weedkiller RoundupTM product. The jury’s award includes $65 million in compensatory and $2 billion in punitive damages, as reported by the Associated Press and Courtroom View Network. This verdict in Barnes v. Monsanto (2025) comes amid a concerted effort by Bayer and other chemical and agribusiness groups to take away the main legal argument, “failure-to-warn,” for the type of litigation that pesticide exposure victims have commonly used to hold companies accountable. This is happening as Governor Brian Kemp of Georgia considers signing into state law a pesticide immunity bill that will prevent future litigation like this in the state. In a deregulatory environment, the courts and state governments are viewed as critical backstops, given the dismantling of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulatory apparatus and extremely limited Congressional oversight. History of Litigation Bayer has lost almost all of the cases filed against it for compensation and punitive damages associated with the plaintiffs’ charge that […]