Center for Food Safety Leads Movement for Science-Based Advocacy Against Industrial Agriculture

WASHINGTON, April 27, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell, a watershed case that could determine whether pesticide manufacturers can avoid legal responsibility for failing to warn the public about the health risks of their products. Center for Food Safety (CFS), the leading legal nonprofit organization working on food and agriculture issues in the United States, is a party to the case and has filed a brief alongside nonprofit allies outlining the significant legal and public health stakes at issue.

The outcome of Monsanto v. Durnell could have sweeping implications for Americans' right-to-know the hazards of pesticides they use, their ability to seek justice for harms caused by toxic pesticides, and states' rights to protect their citizens when the federal government fails them.

The case arises amid ongoing litigation over the legality of the continued use of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup, an Executive Order promoting the production of glyphosate, and coordinated lobbying efforts across the country to secure legislation that could allow federal pesticide law to preempt stronger state-based pesticide protections. CFS won a landmark 2022 federal court ruling striking down the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s 2017 cancer safety determination for glyphosate as unlawful and inconsistent with scientific standards.

In advance of the Supreme Court hearing, CFS released a shocking scientific analysis in support of their amicus briefing outlining how the EPA routinely approves pesticide ingredients it finds to be carcinogenic, including some that pose cancer risks to users as high as 7 in 1,000 of those exposed. In the last 40 years, EPA has classified 200 pesticide active ingredients as "likely" or "possible" carcinogens, yet one virtually never finds a cancer warning on labels of these EPA-approved pesticides.

CFS is also helping to elevate public awareness in conjunction with today's hearing, by participating in the People vs. Poison rally, through ongoing advocacy and organizing, and by bringing together legal experts, scientists, and community voices calling for stronger, science-based protections against the harms of industrial agriculture.

Background

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup, is the most widely used pesticide in the United States. Its use has increased exponentially since the 1990s, when Monsanto released its genetically engineered (GE) "Roundup Ready" crops resistant to glyphosate. Today, 280 million pounds of glyphosate are sprayed annually on 298 million acres of U.S. farmland—an area the size of nearly three Californias. Because of this extremely intensive use, glyphosate is found regularly in food, soil, air, water, and human bodies.

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans" based on evidence of cancer in both humans and animals. Since then, juries in multiple cases have ruled that Monsanto failed to warn people that Roundup could cause cancer, and that the herbicide was a major factor leading to their non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Approximately 100,000 more such cases were settled by Bayer (which acquired Monsanto in 2018) for roughly $10 billion. Other NHL cancer victims continue to sue, with approximately 61,000 cases still pending. Earlier this year, Bayer proposed a $7.25 billion settlement in an attempt to resolve pending lawsuits.

In 2020 EPA issued a long-overdue interim registration review decision for glyphosate which concluded that it was "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans" and that it "did not identify any human health risks from exposure to glyphosate." CFS, representing farmworkers, farmers, and conservationists, challenged the decision. In 2022, a federal court struck down EPA's human health assessment, on the grounds that EPA's denial of glyphosate's cancer-causing potential was contradicted by its admission that glyphosate might cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma, together with multiple violations of the agency's own Cancer Guidelines.

The import of Monsanto v. Durnell goes far beyond glyphosate.  A decision in favor of Monsanto could make any pesticide health warning required by a state or municipality unlawful, which would deprive the public of its right to know if a pesticide causes cancer or other chronic health harm; and it could also be used as a precedent to shield pesticide makers more generally from liability for harms like cancer caused by their products. Oral arguments in the case were heard this morning, with a decision anticipated by the end of June.

Center for Food Safety's mission is to empower people, support farmers, and protect the earth from the harmful impacts of industrial agriculture. Through groundbreaking legal, scientific, and grassroots action, we protect and promote your right to safe food and the environment. Please join our more than one million members across the country at www.centerforfoodsafety.org.  Connect with us on Instagram.

SOURCE The Center For Food Safety