WASHINGTON – TheSupreme Courtwill decide whether to block thousands of lawsuits alleging Monsanto failed to warn people that its popular weedkiller could cause cancer.
The court on Jan. 16 agreed to review a lower court's decision upholding a $1.25 million verdict against Bayer, Monsanto's parent company – just one of the many cases it's fighting.
A St. Louis jury sided with John Durnell, who said his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was caused by his exposure tothe weedkiller Roundup.
Durnell argued Monsanto should have warned consumers that Roundup may be carcinogenic or that they should wear protective gear when applying it.
More:Trump administration backs Bayer's bid to limit Roundup lawsuits
Bayer said such warnings not only weren't required by the Environmental Protection Agency but would have conflicted with federal law.
In a switch of positions since PresidentDonald Trumpreturned to the White House, the Justice Department now says the Supreme Court should get involved.
U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer told the court that the EPA approved the label without a cancer warning and Monsanto couldn't change it without the agency's approval.
"After careful scientific review and an assessment of hundreds of thousands of public comments, EPA has repeatedly determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans, and the agency has repeatedly approved Roundup labels that did not contain cancer warnings," Sauer wrote.
Companies, Sauer said, should not be subject to different labeling requirements in 50 states.
Lawyers for Durnell argued he relied not just on the label, but on Monsanto's advertisements that marketed Roundup as safe to spray without protective equipment.
Lawsuits against Monsanto began after a World Health Organization agency in 2015 said a key Roundup ingredient was"probably carcinogenic to humans."
Bayer, the company that bought Monsanto in 2018, has stopped using glyphosate in Roundup sold to customers for use on their lawns and gardens, though it maintains it's safe for people to use. However, Bayer says it might remove glyphosate from its agricultural markets simply because of the threat posed by the more than 100,000 lawsuits it says it's facing.
The American Farm Bureau Federation and other agricultural groups told the court that glyphosate is "essential to sustaining American farming in the 21st century."
"To remove glyphosate from the market would pose an immediate, devastating risk to America's food supply," the groups said in afilingsupporting Bayer.
Bayer, which has already paid billions of dollars settling Roundup lawsuits, has pushed state legislatures to pass legislation shielding it from liability.
Bayer CEO Bill Anderson called the Supreme Court's decision to hear its appeal "an important step in our multi-pronged strategy to significantly contain this litigation."
"It is time for the U.S. legal system to establish that companies should not be punished under state laws for complying with federal warning label requirements," Anderson said in a statement.
The court is expected to hear oral arguments in the spring in Monsanto Company v. Durnell and issue a decision by late June or early July.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Supreme Court takes up bid involving popular Roundup weedkiller
