{"id":41140,"date":"2026-03-11T00:01:53","date_gmt":"2026-03-11T04:01:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/?p=41140"},"modified":"2026-03-12T10:19:52","modified_gmt":"2026-03-12T14:19:52","slug":"monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/","title":{"rendered":"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">(<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Beyond Pesticides<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">,\u00a0March\u00a011, 2026)\u00a0The Monsanto Company,\u00a0founded in 1901 and\u00a0acquired\u00a0by the multinational corporation\u00a0Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the Supreme Court\u00a0of the U.S.\u00a0(SCOTUS)\u00a0last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org\/assets\/media\/documents\/Certiorari.Granted.01162026.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">question before SCOTUS<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cW<\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">hether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org\/assets\/media\/documents\/dow\/media\/Bates-Dansby.pdf\"><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences<\/span><\/i><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">,\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/544\/431\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">544 U.S. 431<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">, 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, <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/search.aspx?filename=\/docket\/docketfiles\/html\/public\/24-1068.html\"><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Durnell v. Monsanto<\/span><\/i><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">,\u00a0on the\u00a0cancer causing effects of the\u00a0weed killer glyphosate (Roundup<\/span><sup><span data-contrast=\"auto\">TM<\/span><\/sup><span data-contrast=\"auto\">)\u00a0resulted in a jury verdict\u00a0(in\u00a02023)\u00a0of $1.25\u00a0million and the total number of jury verdicts and settlements may amount to over\u00a0$10 billion\u00a0in liability if the Supreme Court upholds the lower courts and hundreds of thousands of other plaintiffs make the same claim.\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">Bayer has\u00a0a multi-pronged strategy to shield pesticide manufacturers from\u00a0liability for failure-to-warn,\u00a0including at the\u00a0Supreme Court,\u00a0in Congress, and in\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org\/resources\/failure-to-warn\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">state legislatures<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">. Last week, Bayer\u00a0successfully pushed for a\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/farm-bill-strips-protections-from-pesticides-for-farmers-consumers-and-the-environment\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">Farm\u00a0Bill<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0(the\u202f<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">, H.R. 7567),\u00a0which was reported out of the Agriculture Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, that\u00a0gives the pesticide industry\u00a0immunity from\u00a0failure-to-warn liability.\u00a0The industry, in lobbying for its vested economic interest, has\u00a0amassed\u00a0a large support structure, which includes key officials in the Trump administration\u00a0and\u00a0a team of lobbyists and\u00a0lobbying\u00a0(\u201cgovernment relations\u201d)\u00a0firms.\u00a0<\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0According to a\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/usrtk.org\/pesticides\/tracing-bayers-ties-to-power-in-trumps-washington\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">new report<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0by U.S. Right to Know,\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Tracing Bayer\u2019s ties to power in Trump\u2019s Washington<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">,\u00a0there have been significant lobbying investments by the multinational pesticide corporation just in the past\u00a0year, including:<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"1\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:1,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769226&quot;:&quot;Aptos&quot;,&quot;469769242&quot;:[8226],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;-&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u201cAt least $9.19 million<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0on federal lobbying in\u00a0[2025]\u201d;<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"1\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:1,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769226&quot;:&quot;Aptos&quot;,&quot;469769242&quot;:[8226],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;-&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0\u201c<\/span><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">16 key administration officials<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\"> with ties to Bayer\u2019s lobbying or legal network. Bayer and its lobbyists have access to people in power at the White House, U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency and even those in high level positions closest to Trump\u201d;<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"1\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:1,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769226&quot;:&quot;Aptos&quot;,&quot;469769242&quot;:[8226],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;-&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u201c<\/span><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">45 people<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0registered to lobby for Bayer under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and at least 13 outside lobby firms \u2013\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.opensecrets.org\/federal-lobbying\/top-lobbying-firms\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">seven of which<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\"> are now among the highest-paid firms in D.C\u201d; and,<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"1\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:1,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769226&quot;:&quot;Aptos&quot;,&quot;469769242&quot;:[8226],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;-&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"4\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u201c<\/span><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">More than 30 senior officials<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0at lobby firms retained by Bayer have direct ties to Trump, having worked in one or both of his administrations or political campaigns.\u201d<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">The authors point out that, across the four main trade and agribusiness groups that rely on pesticide products for their business models (American Chemistry Council,\u00a0CropLife\u00a0America, National Corn Growers Association, and American Soybean Association),\u00a0a \u201ccombined\u00a0<\/span><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">$22 million<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0on federal lobbying in 2025, with\u00a0<\/span><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">12 more outside lobby firms<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0and\u00a0<\/span><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">79 more registered lobbyists<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0in the fourth quarter.\u201d\u00a0Please also see\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/usrtk.org\/pesticides\/bayer-lobby-tracker\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">here<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0for USRTK\u2019s newly published Bayer Lobbying Tracker to follow the money.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Advocates, including farmers, farmworkers, rural communities, public health and medical professionals, and environmentalists, continue to call on their elected officials to oppose pesticide liability shields in their state legislature and in Congress. Learn more at Beyond Pesticides&#8217; <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org\/resources\/failure-to-warn\">Failure-to-Warn resource hub<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n<p aria-level=\"2\"><strong>Review\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">The main arguments in\u00a0the Monsanto brief include:<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%1.\" data-font=\"\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%1.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u201cFIFRA Expressly Preempts Durnell\u2019s Failure-To-Warn Claim\u201d;<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%1.\" data-font=\"\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%1.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u201cFIFRA Impliedly Preempts Durnell\u2019s Failure\u00a0To-Warn Claim\u201d;\u00a0and,<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%1.\" data-font=\"\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%1.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u201cPreemption Of Durnell\u2019s Claims Is Critical\u00a0To\u00a0American Agriculture\u00a0And\u00a0Innovation.\u201d<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ol>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%4.\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:2880,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%4.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"4\"><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Court Precedent.<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0In terms of the first argument\u00a0on express preemption,\u00a0Monsanto alleges that\u00a0the\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\"> (FIFRA) creates binding federal requirements and is a comprehensive regulatory process. The brief maintains that Bayer\u2019s products are not misbranded, contain necessary warnings, do not cause \u201cunreasonable adverse effects (statutory standard in FIFRA),\u201d and the pesticide product label cannot be changed without authorization by EPA. They also allege that the Missouri Court of Appeals is in violation of 7 U.S.C. \u00a7136v(b), which forbids state requirements \u201cin addition to or different from\u201d FIFRA\u2019s labeling regime. Previous SCOTUS cases\u2014including <\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Bates v. Dow\u00a0<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">(2005) <\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">and\u00a0\u202f<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Wisconsin\u00a0Pub. Intervenor v. Mortier\u00a0<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">(501 U.S. 597, 1991)\u2014have already clarified the discrepancies between local, state, and federal responsibilities as they pertain to preemption. (Please see the <em><a href=\"#Bates_01\">Bates<\/a> <\/em><\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Decision section below for\u00a0additional\u00a0details.)\n<p><\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%4.\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:2880,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%4.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"4\"><b><span data-contrast=\"auto\">The law allows injured parties to seek a remedy.<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"auto\"> The second argument on implied preemption\u00a0emerges\u00a0from the logic that the corporation (Monsanto) cannot add a cancer warning without EPA approval, otherwise it could be constituted as a \u201cmisbranded\u201d product.\u00a0Nothing\u00a0in the law prevents the registrant (manufacturer) from proposing a label that\u00a0exceeds\u00a0EPA\u2019s\u00a0minimum\u00a0requirement.\u00a0\u00a0In\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">Bates v. Dow<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">, the Court ruled: \u201c\u202fSection 360k does not preclude States from imposing different or additional\u202f<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">remedies<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">, but only different or additional\u202f<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">requirements<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">. . . Accordingly, although FIFRA does not provide a federal remedy to farmers and others who are injured as a result of a manufacturer\u2019s violation of FIFRA\u2019s labeling requirements, nothing in \u00a7136v(b) precludes States from providing such a remedy.\u201d The court acknowledges the power of the manufacturer over the label, finding, \u201cSuccessful [tort] actions of this sort may <\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">lead manufacturers to petition EPA<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"auto\">\u00a0to allow more detailed labelling of their products\u00a0[emphasis added].\u201d<br \/>\n<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;335559685&quot;:360}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%4.\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"2\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:2880,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%4.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"4\"><span data-contrast=\"none\"><strong>Sustainable alternatives are productive and profitable<\/strong>. T<\/span><span data-contrast=\"auto\">he third argument states that preemption of state-level failure to warn claims is necessary because farmers&#8217; livelihood is harmed by \u201ckeeping efficacious pesticides off the market based on purported risks that EPA has determined are unfounded, or based on risks that are real but reasonable, will cause farmers to resort to products that may create equal (or worse) health and environmental risks, while providing inferior protection for crops.\u201d Moreover, Bayer claims that EPA has been consistent with what it purports to be the overall conclusion \u201cthat glyphosate does not pose a cancer risk and EPA\u2019s express rejection of IARC\u2019s [International Agency for Research on Cancer] contrary view, plaintiffs have parlayed that IARC finding into over one hundred thousand lawsuits seeking billions and billions in liability.\u201d This argument is undermined by the November 2025 retraction of a <\/span><span data-contrast=\"none\">journal article, which was cited in over 800 other peer-reviewed studies, without the authors\u2019 disclosure of their relationship to Monsanto\/Bayer. The editor-and-chief, Martin van den Berg, PhD, of\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/science\/article\/pii\/S0273230099913715\"><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology<\/span><\/i><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">, which published the article 25 years ago, wrote in the journal, \u201cConcerns were raised regarding the authorship of this paper, validity of the research findings in the context of misrepresentation of the contributions by the authors and the study sponsor and potential conflicts of interest of the authors,\u201d thus calling in question EPA\u2019s classification of glyphosate as not carcinogenic. (See <\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Daily News<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2025\/12\/scientific-deception-by-monsanto-bayer-on-display-with-retraction-of-landmark-glyphosate-safety-study\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">here<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">.)<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;335559685&quot;:360}\"><span data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;335559685&quot;:360}\"> Numerous studies find organic production systems to be more productive and profitable than chemical-intensive practices promoted by Bayer\/Monsanto and the agrichemical industry, with savings tied to the natural nutrient cycling and ecosystem services resulting from robust biodiversity. (See <\/span><\/span><a title=\"Permanent Link: Study Affirms that Organic Farming Improves Soil Health, Microbial Life, and Pathogen Resistance\" href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2024\/12\/study-affirms-that-organic-farming-improves-soil-health-microbial-life-and-pathogen-resistance\/\" rel=\"bookmark\">Study Affirms that Organic Farming Improves Soil Health, Microbial Life, and Pathogen Resistance<\/a> with reference to the <a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2022\/12\/climate-friendly-organic-systems-are-more-profitable-for-farmers-than-chemical-intensive-agriculture\/\">Rodale Institute\u2019s\u00a0<em>Farming Systems Trial \u2014 40-Year<\/em>\u00a0<em>Report<\/em><\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p aria-level=\"2\"><strong>Solicitor General Amicus Brief\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">In\u00a0an\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/DocketPDF\/24\/24-1068\/386073\/20251201170732560_24-1068%20--%20Monsanto%20v.%20Durnell.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">amicus brief<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0published on December 1, 2025, the Office of the Solicitor General (SG) and the White House\u00a0called\u00a0on\u00a0SCOTUS\u00a0to grant\u00a0Bayer\u2019s case\u00a0certiorari. The U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer (former Solicitor General of Missouri, home to Bayer-Monsanto\u2019s 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.\u00a0(See\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Daily News\u00a0<\/span><\/i><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2025\/12\/trump-administration-argues-to-us-supreme-court-that-pesticide-companies-cannot-be-sued-for-failing-to-disclose-hazards\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">here<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">.)<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">The U.S. government argues that certiorari should be granted on three grounds:<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%1.\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%1.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">The Missouri Court of Appeals was incorrect in their decision in\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Durnell v. Monsanto<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0(2023) because they argue that there is a prohibition on unilateral label changes for federal labeling requirements; therefore, state tort duties requiring\u00a0additional\u00a0warnings are expressly preempted.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0\n<p><\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%1.\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%1.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">There are now opposing decisions in the Third Circuit and the Ninth and Eleventh Circuits. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that state level failure-to-warn claims are expressly preempted by FIFRA.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0\n<p><\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"%1.\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"3\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:0,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769242&quot;:[65533,0],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;%1.&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">FIFRA \u00a7136v(b) on \u201cUniformity\u201d prohibits states from requiring pesticide manufacturers from having to contend with 50 different labeling requirements.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">The Solicitor General\u2019s position in the Trump administration is a reversal from the Biden Administration\u2019s position after Bayer\u2019s 2022 petition for writ of certiorari. (See\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Daily News\u00a0<\/span><\/i><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2022\/06\/supreme-court-lets-stand-large-jury-verdicts-on-roundup-appeals-court-finds-epa-registration-unlawful\/\">here<\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0for context.)<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p aria-level=\"2\"><strong><a id=\"Bates_01\"><\/a>Review of Bates Decision\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">A\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Pesticides and You<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0article (2005) by\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org\/assets\/media\/documents\/dow\/media\/Bates-Dansby.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">H. Bishop Dansby<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0explains the U.S. Supreme Court decision on \u201cfailure to warn\u201d in\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/544\/431\/\"><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Bates<\/span><\/i><\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/544\/431\/\"><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0v. Dow Agrosciences<\/span><\/i><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">, which includes the following:\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"4\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:1,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769226&quot;:&quot;Aptos&quot;,&quot;469769242&quot;:[8226],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;-&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"1\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><b><span data-contrast=\"none\">Duty to Warn:<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0Manufacturers have a legal duty to provide adequate warnings about the potential risks associated with their products, including pesticides. This duty arises from the recognition that manufacturers\u00a0possess\u00a0knowledge about the potential dangers of their products and have a responsibility to inform consumers about these risks.\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"4\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:1,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769226&quot;:&quot;Aptos&quot;,&quot;469769242&quot;:[8226],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;-&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"2\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><b><span data-contrast=\"none\">Negligence and Design Defect:<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0If a plaintiff alleges that a pesticide product caused harm even when used according to the label, they may argue that the product was negligently designed due to a failure to warn. In other words, they claim that the manufacturer did not adequately warn about the risks associated with the product\u2019s design. The court may view this cause of action as a \u201cfailure to warn\u201d disguised as a \u201cdesign defect.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li aria-setsize=\"-1\" data-leveltext=\"-\" data-font=\"Aptos\" data-listid=\"4\" data-list-defn-props=\"{&quot;335552541&quot;:1,&quot;335559685&quot;:720,&quot;335559991&quot;:360,&quot;469769226&quot;:&quot;Aptos&quot;,&quot;469769242&quot;:[8226],&quot;469777803&quot;:&quot;left&quot;,&quot;469777804&quot;:&quot;-&quot;,&quot;469777815&quot;:&quot;hybridMultilevel&quot;}\" data-aria-posinset=\"3\" data-aria-level=\"1\"><b><span data-contrast=\"none\">Parallel Remedies:<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0The court clarified that state common law tort actions, such as failure to warn claims, can run parallel to federal regulations under the\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0(FIFRA). This means that even though FIFRA regulates pesticide labeling, state actions can still be pursued if they do not conflict with federal regulations and are not preempted.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Bates v. Dow<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0cites an earlier case,\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Ferebee v. Chevron<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0(<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Ferebee,<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u202f<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/law.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/district-courts\/FSupp\/552\/1293\/1525598\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">736 F.\u202f2d<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">, at 1541\u20131542), in which the court found:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u201cBy encouraging plaintiffs to bring suit for injuries not previously recognized as traceable to pesticides such as [the pesticide at issue], a state tort action of the kind under review may aid in the exposure of new dangers associated with pesticides. Successful actions of this sort may lead manufacturers to petition EPA to allow more detailed labelling of their products; alternatively, EPA itself may decide that revised labels are required in light of the new information that has been brought to its attention through common lawsuits. In addition, the specter of damage actions may provide manufacturers with added dynamic incentives to continue to keep abreast of all possible injuries stemming from use of their product so as to forestall such actions through product improvement.\u201d <\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">As\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2022\/06\/supreme-court-lets-stand-large-jury-verdicts-on-roundup-appeals-court-finds-epa-registration-unlawful\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">previously reported\u00a0<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">by Beyond Pesticides, the U.S. Supreme Court spoke with clarity in\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Bates<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">:\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u201cThe long history of tort litigation against manufacturers of poisonous substances adds force to the basic presumption against pre-emption. If Congress had intended to deprive injured parties of a long available form of compensation, it surely would have expressed that intent more clearly. See<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0Silkwood<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0v.\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Kerr-McGee Corp.<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">,\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/464\/238\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">464 U. S. 238<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">, 251 (1984) [<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/544\/431\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">Footnote 25<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">]. Moreover, this history emphasizes the importance of providing an incentive to manufacturers to use the utmost care in the business of distributing inherently dangerous items. See <\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Mortier<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">, 501 U. S., at 613 (stating\u00a0that the 1972 amendments\u2019 goal was to \u201cstrengthen existing labeling requirements and ensure that these requirements were followed in practice\u201d). Particularly given that Congress amended FIFRA to allow EPA to waive efficacy review of newly registered pesticides (and in the course of those amendments, made technical changes to \u00a7136v(b)), it seems unlikely that Congress considered a relatively obscure provision like \u00a7136v(b) to give pesticide manufacturers virtual immunity from certain forms of tort liability. Overenforcement of FIFRA\u2019s misbranding prohibition creates a risk of imposing unnecessary financial burdens on manufacturers; under-enforcement creates not only financial risks for consumers but risks that affect their safety and the environment as well.\u201d<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;335559685&quot;:720}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">In December 2023, farmworker organizations and\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2023\/12\/groups-petition-epa-to-remove-from-the-market-the-weed-killer-glyphosate\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">Beyond Pesticides<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">,\u00a0represented by the Center for Food Safety, filed a\u202f<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centerforfoodsafety.org\/files\/12-13-23_glycancelpet_final_85692.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">petition<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u202fwith EPA urging the agency to remove glyphosate from the market after having won a 2022 court decision forcing EPA to redo its science evaluation.\u00a0<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">That 2022 court decision in the\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centerforfoodsafety.org\/press-releases\/6659\/federal-court-rejects-glyphosate-registration-decision-because-epa-ignored-cancer-risks-endangered-species-risks\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u202fthat EPA\u2019s 2020 approval of glyphosate was \u202f<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centerforfoodsafety.org\/files\/ca9_glyphosate-decision_82995.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">unlawful.<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0The\u00a0court voided\u00a0EPA\u2019s\u202f<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2020\/02\/epa-set-to-reapprove-cancer-causing-glyphosate-and-bee-toxic-neonicotinoids\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u201cinterim registration review\u201d decision approving the continued use of glyphosate, issued in early 2020<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">. \u201cEPA did not adequately consider whether glyphosate causes cancer and shirked its duties under the\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Endangered Species Act<\/span><\/i><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0(ESA),\u201d the court wrote\u202f<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centerforfoodsafety.org\/files\/ca9_glyphosate-decision_82995.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">in its opinion.<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0At the time of the decision, Beyond Pesticides said: \u201cEPA\u2019s failure to act on the science, as detailed in the litigation, has real-world adverse health consequences for farmworkers, the public, and ecosystems. Because of this lawsuit, the agency\u2019s obstruction of the regulatory process will not be allowed to stand, and EPA should start shifting food production to available\u00a0alternative non- and less-toxic practices and materials that meet its statutory duty.\u201d As reported by the Center for Food Safety, \u201c[T]he court struck down, or vacated the human health assessment. The court also required that EPA redo and\/or finish all remaining glyphosate determinations by an October 2022 deadline, or within four months. This includes a redone ecological toxicity assessment, a redone costs analysis of impacts to farmers from pesticide harms, as well as all Endangered Species analysis and mitigation.\u201d (See\u00a0<\/span><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">Daily News\u00a0<\/span><\/i><a href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2024\/02\/bayer-monsanto-in-roundup-glyphosate-case-stung-with-largest-multi-billion-dollar-jury-award-turns-to-state-houses-to-stop-litigation\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">here<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">.)<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p aria-level=\"2\"><strong>Call to Action\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">As the Farm Bill moves to the House Floor, Beyond Pesticides\u00a0will strive to remove Title X, Part 1 of the legislation.\u00a0Updates will be provided with background\u00a0information as Farm Bill legislation moves through the\u00a0U.S. Senate.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">In the meantime, consider the following action opposing the allowance of an unregistered PFAS pesticide under an \u201cemergency\u201d waiver provision in federal pesticide law. Policy and toxicology are slated to collide as EPA considers allowing the use of a PFAS pesticide by invoking an emergency waiver process. If authorized, EPA\u2019s decision will permit the use of an unregistered pesticide under an emergency waiver provision\u2014in this case, an emergency caused by weed resistance to weed killers (herbicides) on the market. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"auto\">EPA is accepting public comments until March 16, 11:59 pm EDT. Beyond Pesticides is urging the public to object to EPA approval by <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/secure.everyaction.com\/4AuuDR9izkGzHY1M9gMaIA2\">writing to EPA and\u202fCongress stating that herbicide resistance is not an emergency and PFAS chemicals must not be broadcast in the environment.<\/a>\u202f\u00a0<\/p>\n<p><span data-contrast=\"none\">You can continue to stay apprised of the most pressing developments on various issues and campaigns by signing up for\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/secure.everyaction.com\/pwg2_EDS5EyIr4jA550SNw2\"><i>Weekly News Update and Action of the Week<\/i><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u2014including a call to\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/secure.everyaction.com\/vkXa7CCDE0G6dlqjKgJRhw2\">tell your governor<\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">\u00a0to\u00a0adopt policies that support organic land management and ecological balance.<\/span><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><i><span data-contrast=\"none\">All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.<\/span><\/i><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b><span data-contrast=\"none\">Sources<\/span><\/b><span data-contrast=\"none\">:\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/DocketPDF\/24\/24-1068\/397048\/20260223143047764_24-1068%20Final%20Monsanto%20Co.%20v%20Durnell%20merits%20opening%20brief.pdf\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">Bayer<\/span><\/a><span data-contrast=\"none\">;\u00a0<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/usrtk.org\/pesticides\/tracing-bayers-ties-to-power-in-trumps-washington\/\"><span data-contrast=\"none\">U.S. Right to Know<\/span><\/a><span data-ccp-props=\"{}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>(Beyond Pesticides,\u00a0March\u00a011, 2026)\u00a0The Monsanto Company,\u00a0founded in 1901 and\u00a0acquired\u00a0by the multinational corporation\u00a0Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the Supreme Court\u00a0of the U.S.\u00a0(SCOTUS)\u00a0last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0question before SCOTUS\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cWhether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences,\u00a0544 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,\u00a0on the\u00a0cancer causing effects of the\u00a0weed killer glyphosate (RoundupTM)\u00a0resulted in a jury verdict\u00a0(in\u00a02023)\u00a0of $1.25\u00a0million and the total number of jury verdicts and settlements may amount to over\u00a0$10 billion\u00a0in liability if [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":41142,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[249,2,1832,158,574,354,1986,373,1830,1831,243,62,68,10,360,1726,1],"tags":[1358,2128,1171,2434,2506,2508,605,1356,728,784,2505,2429,730,2507,1354,731,1351,2256,1176,727,681,2430,2129],"class_list":["post-41140","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-agriculture","category-alternativesorganics","category-and-rodenticide-act-fifra","category-bayer","category-congress","category-environmental-protection-agency-epa","category-failure-to-warn","category-farm-bill","category-federal-insecticide","category-fungicide","category-label-claims","category-litigation","category-monsanto","category-pesticide-regulation","category-preemption","category-u-s-supreme-court","category-uncategorized","tag-bates","tag-bates-et-al-v-dow-agrosciences","tag-bayer","tag-durnell","tag-durnell-v-monsanto","tag-duty-to-warn","tag-epa","tag-failure-to-warn","tag-farm-bill","tag-fifra","tag-immunity","tag-industry-influence","tag-labeling","tag-liability-shield","tag-litigation","tag-local-authority","tag-monsanto","tag-pesticide-label","tag-pesticide-regulation","tag-preemption","tag-supreme-court","tag-u-s-supreme-court","tag-wisconsin-public-intervenor-v-mortier"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v26.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers - Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Monsanto Company,\u00a0acquired\u00a0by Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0question before SCOTUS\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cWhether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences,\u00a0544 U.S. 431,\u00a0which upheld\u00a0EPA and state registration of pesticides\u00a0as\u00a0a floor of protection,\u00a0without\u00a0releasing\u00a0manufacturers of the responsibility to warn\u00a0for potential harm\u00a0that is not required by EPA.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers - Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Monsanto Company,\u00a0acquired\u00a0by Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0question before SCOTUS\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cWhether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences,\u00a0544 U.S. 431,\u00a0which upheld\u00a0EPA and state registration of pesticides\u00a0as\u00a0a floor of protection,\u00a0without\u00a0releasing\u00a0manufacturers of the responsibility to warn\u00a0for potential harm\u00a0that is not required by EPA.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-03-11T04:01:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-03-12T14:19:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1080\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Beyond Pesticides\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@ByondPesticides\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ByondPesticides\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Beyond Pesticides\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Beyond Pesticides\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/person\/1b5c0a0981b549cc5b628770073031f4\"},\"headline\":\"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-11T04:01:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-12T14:19:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/\"},\"wordCount\":2541,\"commentCount\":2,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Bates\",\"Bates et al v Dow Agrosciences\",\"Bayer\",\"Durnell\",\"Durnell v. Monsanto\",\"duty to warn\",\"EPA\",\"failure to warn\",\"farm bill\",\"FIFRA\",\"immunity\",\"industry influence\",\"labeling\",\"liability shield\",\"litigation\",\"local authority\",\"Monsanto\",\"pesticide label\",\"pesticide regulation\",\"preemption\",\"Supreme Court\",\"U.S. Supreme Court\",\"Wisconsin Public Intervenor v Mortier\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Agriculture\",\"Alternatives\/Organics\",\"and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)\",\"Bayer\",\"Congress\",\"Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)\",\"Failure to Warn\",\"Farm Bill\",\"Federal Insecticide\",\"Fungicide\",\"Label Claims\",\"Litigation\",\"Monsanto\",\"Pesticide Regulation\",\"Preemption\",\"U.S. Supreme Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/\",\"name\":\"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers - Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-11T04:01:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-12T14:19:52+00:00\",\"description\":\"The Monsanto Company,\u00a0acquired\u00a0by Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0question before SCOTUS\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cWhether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences,\u00a0544 U.S. 431,\u00a0which upheld\u00a0EPA and state registration of pesticides\u00a0as\u00a0a floor of protection,\u00a0without\u00a0releasing\u00a0manufacturers of the responsibility to warn\u00a0for potential harm\u00a0that is not required by EPA.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1080},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/\",\"name\":\"Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog\",\"description\":\"News on Pesticide Science, Policy and Activism\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Beyond Pesticides\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/BeyondPesticides-Logo-Stacked-scaled.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/BeyondPesticides-Logo-Stacked-scaled.jpg\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":2501,\"caption\":\"Beyond Pesticides\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/ByondPesticides\",\"https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/beyondpesticides\/?hl=en\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/beyond-pesticides\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/bpncamp\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/person\/1b5c0a0981b549cc5b628770073031f4\",\"name\":\"Beyond Pesticides\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e26b7558fcb265e244c6e159abe5f0aab551822dc82fd0b1607e809bdfbed20a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e26b7558fcb265e244c6e159abe5f0aab551822dc82fd0b1607e809bdfbed20a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Beyond Pesticides\"},\"description\":\"Beyond Pesticides is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C., which works with allies in protecting public health and the environment to lead the transition to a world free of toxic pesticides. The founders, who established Beyond Pesticides (originally as National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides) as a nonprofit membership organization in 1981, felt that without the existence of such an organized, national network, local, state and national pesticide policy would become, under chemical industry pressure, increasingly unresponsive to public health and environmental concerns. Beyond Pesticides believes that people must have a voice in decisions that affect them directly. We believe decisions should not be made for us by chemical companies or by decision-makers who either do not have all of the facts or refuse to consider them. Learn more about our work, read A Year in Review\u20142021, our accomplishments are your victories! Beyond Pesticides seeks to protect healthy air, water, land, and food for ourselves and future generations. By forging ties with governments, nonprofits, and people who rely on these natural resources, we reduce the need for unnecessary pesticide use and protect public health and the environment. Beyond Pesticides provides hands-on services to the public and supports local action by: identifying and interpreting hazards; and, designing safe pest management programs. With the information provided by Beyond Pesticides, people may not only be able to make informed choices and adopt practices that protect themselves and their families from unnecessary exposure to pesticides, but they will be able to effect changes on community-wide pest management decisions and policies that govern pesticide use, such as pesticide uses in parks, schools, for community insect control and along roadsides. Beyond Pesticides believes that people must have a voice in decisions which affect them directly.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides\/\",\"https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/beyondpesticides\/\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/beyond-pesticides\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/ByondPesticides\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/bpncamp\/\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/author\/beyond-pesticides\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers - Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog","description":"The Monsanto Company,\u00a0acquired\u00a0by Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0question before SCOTUS\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cWhether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences,\u00a0544 U.S. 431,\u00a0which upheld\u00a0EPA and state registration of pesticides\u00a0as\u00a0a floor of protection,\u00a0without\u00a0releasing\u00a0manufacturers of the responsibility to warn\u00a0for potential harm\u00a0that is not required by EPA.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers - Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog","og_description":"The Monsanto Company,\u00a0acquired\u00a0by Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0question before SCOTUS\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cWhether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences,\u00a0544 U.S. 431,\u00a0which upheld\u00a0EPA and state registration of pesticides\u00a0as\u00a0a floor of protection,\u00a0without\u00a0releasing\u00a0manufacturers of the responsibility to warn\u00a0for potential harm\u00a0that is not required by EPA.","og_url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/","og_site_name":"Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides\/","article_published_time":"2026-03-11T04:01:53+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-03-12T14:19:52+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1080,"url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Beyond Pesticides","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@ByondPesticides","twitter_site":"@ByondPesticides","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Beyond Pesticides","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/"},"author":{"name":"Beyond Pesticides","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/person\/1b5c0a0981b549cc5b628770073031f4"},"headline":"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers","datePublished":"2026-03-11T04:01:53+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-12T14:19:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/"},"wordCount":2541,"commentCount":2,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg","keywords":["Bates","Bates et al v Dow Agrosciences","Bayer","Durnell","Durnell v. Monsanto","duty to warn","EPA","failure to warn","farm bill","FIFRA","immunity","industry influence","labeling","liability shield","litigation","local authority","Monsanto","pesticide label","pesticide regulation","preemption","Supreme Court","U.S. Supreme Court","Wisconsin Public Intervenor v Mortier"],"articleSection":["Agriculture","Alternatives\/Organics","and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)","Bayer","Congress","Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)","Failure to Warn","Farm Bill","Federal Insecticide","Fungicide","Label Claims","Litigation","Monsanto","Pesticide Regulation","Preemption","U.S. Supreme Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/","url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/","name":"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers - Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg","datePublished":"2026-03-11T04:01:53+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-12T14:19:52+00:00","description":"The Monsanto Company,\u00a0acquired\u00a0by Bayer\u00a0AG\u00a0in 2018,\u00a0submitted\u00a0its\u00a0opening brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. last month,\u00a0seeking liability\u00a0immunity\u00a0from\u00a0lawsuits filed by\u00a0product users who have been harmed but not warned about potential product hazards.\u00a0The\u00a0question before SCOTUS\u00a0is:\u00a0\u201cWhether 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.\u201d\u00a0If successful,\u00a0the Court\u00a0would be\u00a0overturning\u00a0(reversing)\u00a0its\u00a02005 decision in\u00a0Bates\u00a0v.\u00a0Dow Agrosciences,\u00a0544 U.S. 431,\u00a0which upheld\u00a0EPA and state registration of pesticides\u00a0as\u00a0a floor of protection,\u00a0without\u00a0releasing\u00a0manufacturers of the responsibility to warn\u00a0for potential harm\u00a0that is not required by EPA.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/DN-3.11.26.jpg","width":1920,"height":1080},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/2026\/03\/monsanto-opening-brief-introduced-as-u-s-supreme-court-considers-liability-immunity-for-pesticide-manufacturers\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Monsanto Brief Introduced as U.S. Supreme Court Considers Liability Immunity for Pesticide Manufacturers"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/","name":"Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog","description":"News on Pesticide Science, Policy and Activism","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#organization","name":"Beyond Pesticides","url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/BeyondPesticides-Logo-Stacked-scaled.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/BeyondPesticides-Logo-Stacked-scaled.jpg","width":2560,"height":2501,"caption":"Beyond Pesticides"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides","https:\/\/x.com\/ByondPesticides","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/beyondpesticides\/?hl=en","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/beyond-pesticides","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/bpncamp"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/person\/1b5c0a0981b549cc5b628770073031f4","name":"Beyond Pesticides","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e26b7558fcb265e244c6e159abe5f0aab551822dc82fd0b1607e809bdfbed20a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e26b7558fcb265e244c6e159abe5f0aab551822dc82fd0b1607e809bdfbed20a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Beyond Pesticides"},"description":"Beyond Pesticides is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C., which works with allies in protecting public health and the environment to lead the transition to a world free of toxic pesticides. The founders, who established Beyond Pesticides (originally as National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides) as a nonprofit membership organization in 1981, felt that without the existence of such an organized, national network, local, state and national pesticide policy would become, under chemical industry pressure, increasingly unresponsive to public health and environmental concerns. Beyond Pesticides believes that people must have a voice in decisions that affect them directly. We believe decisions should not be made for us by chemical companies or by decision-makers who either do not have all of the facts or refuse to consider them. Learn more about our work, read A Year in Review\u20142021, our accomplishments are your victories! Beyond Pesticides seeks to protect healthy air, water, land, and food for ourselves and future generations. By forging ties with governments, nonprofits, and people who rely on these natural resources, we reduce the need for unnecessary pesticide use and protect public health and the environment. Beyond Pesticides provides hands-on services to the public and supports local action by: identifying and interpreting hazards; and, designing safe pest management programs. With the information provided by Beyond Pesticides, people may not only be able to make informed choices and adopt practices that protect themselves and their families from unnecessary exposure to pesticides, but they will be able to effect changes on community-wide pest management decisions and policies that govern pesticide use, such as pesticide uses in parks, schools, for community insect control and along roadsides. Beyond Pesticides believes that people must have a voice in decisions which affect them directly.","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.beyondpesticides.org","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/beyondpesticides\/","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/beyondpesticides\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/beyond-pesticides\/","https:\/\/x.com\/ByondPesticides","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/bpncamp\/"],"url":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/author\/beyond-pesticides\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41140","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=41140"}],"version-history":[{"count":18,"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41140\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":41167,"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41140\/revisions\/41167"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/41142"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=41140"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=41140"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/beyondpesticides.org\/dailynewsblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=41140"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}