Trump administration backs Bayer’s bid to curb Roundup lawsuits

 

On December 1, 2025, the administration of Donald Trump urged the United States Supreme Court to accept an appeal by Bayer and sharply limit — or potentially end — thousands of lawsuits alleging its weedkiller Roundup causes cancer. Reuters+2The Straits Times+2

Why the administration intervened

• In a brief filed on behalf of the U.S. government, U.S. Solicitor General’s Office (led by D. John Sauer) backed Bayer’s argument that federal pesticide laws should preempt state-level “failure-to-warn” claims — meaning state courts should not be allowed to impose stricter warning requirements than those already mandated by the federal regulator, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). whbl.com+2Bayer+2

• According to the brief, EPA has repeatedly found that glyphosate — Roundup’s active ingredient — is “not likely to be carcinogenic in humans,” and has approved Roundup labeling without cancer warnings. euronews+2The Straits Times+2

What’s at stake: the lawsuits and financial liability

• The case that triggered this appeal involved a Missouri jury awarding US$1.25 million to a plaintiff — John Durnell — who claimed exposure to Roundup led to his diagnosis of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Reuters+2Investing.com+2

• Bayer currently faces well over 67,000 lawsuits across U.S. state and federal courts, many alleging that long-term exposure to Roundup caused cancer. The Straits Times+2Investing.com+2

• To date, the company has reportedly paid around US$10 billion in settlements and litigation costs — but liability remains for many more claims. Investing.com+2Investing.com+2

Why this court appeal could make a big difference

If the Supreme Court accepts Bayer’s appeal and rules in its favor:

• It could establish that federal pesticide regulation “preempts” — i.e. overrides — state-level lawsuits that demand stronger warnings or stricter liability standards than those approved at the federal level;

• That would sharply reduce (or possibly eliminate) the ability of plaintiffs to bring new lawsuits under state tort or consumer-protection laws, significantly cutting Bayer’s potential future liability;

• For Bayer, this could mean an end to the long-running Roundup litigation saga and improved regulatory clarity — a situation welcomed by both the company and supporters in the agriculture and business sectors. Bayer+2euronews+2

Criticism and remaining controversy

Opponents of the move argue that allowing the company to escape liability effectively denies justice to individuals who claim serious harm after using Roundup. Some say that even if EPA has approved glyphosate as “safe,” there remains scientific and epidemiological debate over long-term cancer risk — and that state courts should be allowed to assess claims independently. Critics also note that the case raises broader concerns about whether federal environmental approvals should automatically shield manufacturers from all liability under state law.