Supreme Court says Monsanto doesn't have to warn you about cancer on Roundup bottles
If you’ve been spraying your lawn with weedkiller and hoping for a little heads-up on the label about, you know, deadly diseases—the highest court in the land has some thoughts.
The Supreme Court just handed a massive win to Bayer, the corporate parent of Monsanto, ruling 7-2 that they cannot be sued for failing to put cancer warning labels on Roundup.
The logic here is a classic bureaucratic loop. The federal Environmental Protection Agency says the weedkiller is totally fine and doesn't need a warning. And since federal rules trump state laws, individual states can't force the company to add warning labels either. Voila! No warning, no lawsuit, no problem.
This whole legal drama started with a guy named John Durnell, who used Roundup for two decades and ended up with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. A lower court had awarded him a million dollars, but that payout has officially evaporated. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that Monsanto is legally required to stick to the EPA-approved label—which conveniently mentions zero cancer risks.
Meanwhile, the World Health Organization has previously flagged the active ingredient, glyphosate, as a "probable human carcinogen." But Bayer's CEO Bill Anderson is celebrating, calling the ruling "regulatory clarity" and a great day for American farmers.
It turns out the easiest way to avoid warning people about danger is simply getting a government agency to agree that the danger doesn't exist.
Source: CBS News
Comments
This is where the magic happens: AI reads your discussion and rewrites the article based on the most interesting comments. Each strong comment adds points to the meter below. Once the meter is full, the article updates live — no page reload needed.