Pesticide Ruling Strips Rights of Iowa Cancer Patients
- On June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court issued opinions including a ruling in Monsanto vs. John Durnell that a letter writer argues was a rare instance of the court getting it right.
- The Environmental Protection Agency did not require warning labels for Roundup based on solid scientific reasons; Health Canada states no pesticide regulatory authority currently considers glyphosate a cancer risk to humans.
- Legal arguments for a 'failure to warn' fail because the product requires no warning, and the court affirmed that being able to sue requires proof of injury by the defendant.
- Although Erwin Chemerinsky argued that recent 'Justices' decisions slam closed the courthouse doors,' the Durnell case demonstrates the court correctly applying legal standards despite broader concerns about limiting redress.
- Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the separate Mullin vs. Al Otro Lado ruling will result in more people dying, highlighting the Supreme Court's varied impact on individual rights this term.
14 Articles
14 Articles
'Deep irony': Expert says Supreme Court just rug-pulled core obsession of MAHA movement
President Donald Trump brought anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. into his coalition in 2024, creating the so-called "Make America Healthy Again" movement by wooing a broad swathe of health activists and medicine deniers to join his cause. But the Supreme Court he helped appoint ...
Supreme Court deals MAHA a loss on pesticides
Leer en español The Supreme Court ruled on June 25 that federal law protects Monsanto from tens of thousands of lawsuits from people claiming the weed killer Roundup caused their cancer. The 7-2 decision effectively ends a legal pathway for people who say they were harmed by products that the federal government declined to adequately regulate. The decision is a loss for the Make America Healthy Again Movement, which sees glyphosate — the widely …
Letters to the Editor: The Supreme Court actually got it right in ruling in favor of Roundup
'This was a rare instance of the current Supreme Court getting it right. It will cut down on frivolous lawsuits that run counter to science. There is no failure to warn argument when there is nothing that merits a warning,' writes an L.A. Times reader.
Pesticide ruling strips rights of Iowa cancer patients
By Mark Moran Cancer patients in Iowa will be unable to seek legal action against chemical makers under a recent Supreme Court ruling in favor of glyphosate manufacturers. Glyphosate is the pesticide found in the weedkiller Roundup. Some farmers in the Midwest have said the pesticide ruling is helpful because it provides stability around use of the product. But state Sen. Catelin Drey, D-Sioux City, who founded Moms for Iowa, a nonprofit for can…
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 50% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
