Ag Groups Ask Biden Administration for Supreme Court Glyphosate Intervention

Several years ago, when Bayer CropScience lost the first court case involving glyphosate and plaintiff Edwin Hardeman, the company promised to appeal the decision “all the way to the Supreme Court.” And it seemed as if this was exactly where the case would end up.

However, Bayer and many folks within the agricultural community were first waiting to see the written opinion of the nation’s Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar, on the matter. This was published on May 10.

It was not what the industry was hoping for.

In the letter, the Solicitor General advised the Supreme Court against hearing the case. In essence, Prelogar said in her letter that “federal pesticide registration and labeling requirements do not preclude states from imposing additional labeling requirements, even if those requirements run counter to federal findings.”

Once this initial letter was published, Bayer released the following statement: “The company continues to believe there are strong legal arguments to support Supreme Court review and reversal in Hardeman, as its petition and the many amicus briefs filed in support of the petition underscore. Indeed, the expert U.S. agency, the EPA, has consistently found that glyphosate-based herbicides can be used safely and are not carcinogenic. Therefore, a cancer warning would be false and misleading and would be preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).”

Now, 54 agricultural associations and trade groups have sent a letter directly to President Joe Biden, asking him to “swiftly withdraw” the Solicitor General’s brief. Among these were the Agricultural Retailers Association, CropLife America, the American Farm Bureau Federation, and the American Soybean Association (ASA). These groups warned that the new policy being proposed “would set a dangerous precedent that threatens the science-based regulatory process.”

“Federal law is clear that pesticide labels cannot be false or misleading,” wrote ASA President Brad Doyle. “Allowing states to require health warnings contrary to decades of sound science is beyond disturbing and obviously not in line with federal law. I and other farmers are concerned this new policy will open the floodgates to a patchwork of state labels that will undermine grower access to safe, effective pesticides needed to farm productively and sustainably.”