You’ve Got To Pay To Play: Monsanto-Bayer Has Been Avoiding Legal Liability For Too Long
Introduction
Seventy-one-year-old Christine Sheppard, a longtime gardener who regularly used Roundup, has battled non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma—a rare, aggressive cancer—for 12 years, living under the constant threat of immobilization and eventual death.[1] Merril Hoge, a former NFL football player who had always been very health conscious, was diagnosed with that same form of cancer in 2003 after using Roundup since the 1970s.[2] Hoge is one of the lucky ones; following an intense chemotherapy protocol that Hoge says he felt “literally scream through [his] veins,” he managed to defeat the diagnosis.[3] Both Sheppard and Hoge claim that Roundup caused their cancer.
Additionally, tens of thousands of other people have filed suit since the 2010s, claiming, like Sheppard and Hoge, that Roundup caused their cancer and that the company that manufactures Roundup should be held liable because it concealed data linking Roundup to cancer, fraudulently tampered with studies to make it seem like the chemical is safe, and colluded with the U.S. government to continue these practices.[4] Claimants cite numerous international studies and allege governmental corruption to evidence their claims.[5] Conversely, Monsanto, the company that developed and manufactures Roundup, relying on EPA approval and its own set of studies, has long maintained that there is no definitive link between Roundup and cancer.[6]
Though courts have been inconsistent in their recent holdings, mounting plaintiff judgments are leading Monsanto to reevaluate its legal strategy and lobby politicians for statutory legal immunity.[7] Monsanto has allegedly colluded with plaintiff law firms and is now asserting that it is shielded from consumer claims because the claims are preempted by federal pesticide regulations.[8] This paper analyzes a string of recent product liability cases with split decisions against the relevant legal framework and data considerations to advance the position that Monsanto should consistently be held accountable for the health damage that its product causes.
In light of public policy considerations and the data analysis herein, as additional Roundup product liability cases inevitably come before courts in varying jurisdictions, Monsanto-Bayer should be held liable. The first Part of this paper presents a factual company history and foundational regulatory framework. Next, in Part II, product liability laws are provided, Roundup product liability cases from 2018 through today are compiled and reported, and Monsanto-Bayer’s legal strategies to avoid liability are examined. In Part III of the paper, the various components of the research are analyzed in support of the thesis.
I. Background
Humans have participated in and regarded agriculture for centuries; early settlors to what is today the U.S. brought this reverence for agriculture with them from Europe.[9] In recognition that agriculture is exceptional, the country has embraced and fostered the practice of agriculture since the country’s inception.[10] As technology advanced and the industrial revolution was underway, agricultural economies of scale grew large as individuals’ general awareness of where their food was coming from grew further away.[11] To ensure that agriculture was protected, people had food, and farmers were incentivized to remain involved in agriculture, the federal government began regulating the field in the early 1910s.[12] That regulation has evolved, such that today, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is primarily responsible for regulating agriculture, which includes seeds, in the country in tandem with a number of other agencies and regulations.[13]
A. Company Snapshot: From Monsanto Chemical Works to Monsanto-Bayer
Modern technology and corporate business strategy have evolved and shifted in alignment with the evolving regulatory framework, to the point that, by 2015, six firms controlled the global seed and agrichemical business – the so-called Big Six.[14] Through a series of complex mergers in 2016 and 2017, those six companies consolidated to three; Monsanto-Bayer is one of those three.[15] In 2020, an estimated 80% of U.S.-grown corn and 90% of U.S.-grown soybeans originated from Monsanto-Bayer seeds.[16] Yet, from the perspective of modern farmers, when it comes to challenges that they face, “Monsanto is at the heart of the problem.”[17] Furthermore, Monsanto has become highly controversial with the public for their involvement in the development and promotion of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), their production of pesticides potentially linked to cancer and other health issues, and attempting to manipulate regulatory forces and scientific studies in their favor.[18] The science is as conflicting as the courts are undecided.[19]
1. Monsanto Company History
Monsanto as a company did not originate in the agricultural business.[20] The company was founded in 1901 by John Queeny to manufacture the synthetic sweetener saccharin.[21] Queeny named the company Monsanto Chemical Works after his wife’s maiden name.[22] Over the next few years, the company expanded by adding vanillin and caffeine to its product line and additionally adding Coca-Cola Company to its customer list, to the point that by 1915, sales topped $1 million.[23] By 1917, Monsanto Chemical Company further expanded by adding aspirin to its product line.[24]
Throughout the next few decades, Monsanto Chemical Works flourished, aiding the country in war manufacturing efforts during both World Wars, formally incorporating in 1933, and adding styrene (a rubber component) to its product line.[25] Monsanto was one of nine companies that produced Agent Orange, a form of chemical warfare that has since been proven to be carcinogenic, for the U.S. government during the Vietnam War.[26] The corporation eluded legal liability for Agent Orange’s health effects because the product was produced for the government.[27] Monsanto also manufactured DDT and PCBs, so-called “breakthrough” chemicals that were later found to cause detrimental harm to humans.[28]
To reflect its diversified product line, the company changed its name to Monsanto Chemical Company in 1933 and then to Monsanto Company (hereinafter “Monsanto”) in 1964 after it began producing NutraSweet artificial sweetener.[29] Because lawsuits relating to the safety of the company’s products and chemicals began to accumulate, Monsanto strategically entered the agriculture industry.[30] In the 1990s, Monsanto became a prominent manufacturer of genetically modified crop seeds when the company acquired numerous biotechnology businesses.[31] In 2000, Monsanto sold its sweeteners business, merged with a global pharmaceutical company, and consolidated its nonpharmaceutical business components into a new entity.[32]
Consequently, Monsanto’s primary business industry focuses became agriculture and biotechnology; the company acquired software and seed businesses and began promoting GMOs.[33] Specifically, Monsanto’s main product became its Roundup insecticide, which featured glyphosate, a chemical invented by Monsanto in the recipe, and the seeds that the company genetically modified to be resistant to Roundup insecticide, known as Roundup-Ready seeds.[34] From the start, there was public opposition to Monsanto’s GMOs and associated skepticism surrounding health issues that the company’s chemicals had been historically, and were allegedly still, linked to.[35] Monsanto, however, rebuked the allegations by branding itself as “a savior of humanity, uniquely able to feed the world’s nutritionally insecure masses.”[36]Nevertheless, by the 2010s, numerous lawsuits had been filed claiming that glyphosate, a chemical in the company’s main product, Roundup, caused cancer.[37]
2. Bayer Company History
Bayer, a German company that had been in incorporated since 1881, invented and manufactured aspirin.[38]During World War I, Bayer participated in a complex merger with other German companies, which manufactured pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and dyestuffs, resulting in a powerful syndicate called the “Syndicate of German Coal-Tar Dye Manufacturers.”[39] Over the next few decades, the companies further formalized and formed the IG Farber conglomerate in 1925.[40] The company was based in Frankfurt, Germany, but expanded operations internationally by the early 1930s.[41]
During World War II, IG Farber established operations at Auschwitz where the company conducted drug experiments on live inmates and capitalized on slave labor.[42] Western powers eventually reached an agreement with West Germany to divide the company into three entities instead of dissolving it completely.[43] In the early 1950s, the three new entities became Bayer, Hoechst, and BASF.[44] As part of the new company’s strategy, Bayer expanded for the next five decades by acquiring businesses and diversifying its industry involvement.[45] In 2002, Bayer formally established a crop science division. The crop science division expanded to the point that the company became the world’s largest insecticide manufacturer over the next decade.[46]
3. The Monsanto-Bayer Corporate Consolidation & Present Company Position
In 2016, Bayer, the European company, announced it was in negotiations to purchase Monsanto, the American agrichemical giant.[47] At the time of the acquisition, Monsanto was the world’s largest seed company, with control of an estimated 23% of the global seed market.[48] The Monsanto-Bayer deal officially closed in June 2018; having survived antitrust examination, Bayer purchased Monsanto for $63 billion cash.[49] Within weeks of the deal closing, however, on August 10, 2018, Monsanto suffered its first defeat in U.S. court in a case alleging that the company’s main product, Roundup herbicide, causes cancer.[50] Shortly thereafter, two more legal defeats occurred, and the new company (hereinafter referred to as “Monsanto-Bayer”) found itself owing over $190 million in damages.[51] As a result, the company’s share value decreased by about 30% right after the acquisition was finalized.[52] Nevertheless, the company’s profits, market share, and global acreage saturation continued to increase until the mid-2010s.[53]
B. U.S. Pesticide Oversight
In the U.S., pesticides are primarily regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).[54] Prior to any pesticide being legally sold, distributed, or used in the country, it must be licensed by the EPA.[55] The authority and mandate for this regulation comes under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), codified in Title 7 of the U.S. Code at sections 136-136y.[56] Part of the responsibility of the manufacturer to obtain pre-market EPA licensure includes a requirement to show that the pesticide “will not generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.”[57] FIFRA defines the term “environment” to include people.[58] Although the EPA is mandated to regulate pesticides within the FIFRA framework, the Administrator of the EPA is statutorily granted broad discretion to issue the guidelines and establish the process for appropriately carrying out that mandate.[59] Additionally, since the 1970s, the federal Food & Drug Administration (FDA) cooperatively participates in pesticide oversight with the EPA based on a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the agencies.[60] Currently, three federal agencies are collectively responsible for regulating and monitoring pesticides: the EPA, the FDA, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).[61]
Independently from the EPA and FDA, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a subsidiary of the CDC, administers a state Pesticide Surveillance Program; state participation is voluntary but is incentivized through funding mechanisms.[62] The program is designed to monitor workplace pesticide-related injuries or illnesses.[63]Specific program goals include federal policy reform, education and training improvements, safer product application in schools, and improved labeling.[64] Currently, thirteen states participate.[65]
C. The Controversy
Glyphosate was first introduced to the market by Monsanto in the 1970s.[66] The company then introduced Roundup and Roundup Ready seeds to the market in the mid-1990s.[67] Roundup Ready seeds are seeds that have been genetically engineered to grow crops that are resistant to Monsanto’s leading herbicide, Roundup, a glyphosate-based product.[68] Essentially, this means that less manpower is needed by farmers to control weeds because Monsanto’s revolutionary, proprietary seed-herbicide combination handled weed control for them.[69] During early adoption, the labor saved by farmers combined with Monsanto’s marketing campaign, labelled the “No-Till Revolution,” brought Roundup Ready seeds, Roundup herbicide, and, consequently, the Monsanto company great success.[70] Today, the company’s genetically engineered crops include soybeans, alfalfa, wheat, corn, potatoes, and sugar beets.[71]
At first, the technology seemed to work; less labor inputs were necessary while greater outputs resulted.[72]However, over time, noxious superweeds and Roundup-resistant pests evolved, necessitating application of ever-increasing amounts of Roundup to accomplish the same requisite level of weed and pest control.[73] In fact, annual glyphosate use worldwide tripled from 90 million pounds to over 290 million pounds between 2001 and 2012 alone.[74]As more and more chemical product was applied, Monsanto-Bayer’s profits and market share continued to increase.[75]
Meanwhile, droves of consumers who regularly applied Roundup started experiencing health issues and were subsequently diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer.[76] The consumers claim that Roundup caused their cancer and have proffered expert testimony to support their position.[77] Monsanto-Bayer, however, relying heavily on the EPA, claims the Roundup was not connected to the cancer diagnoses and that deciding juries are misunderstanding the science; the company has also proffered expert testimony to support their position.[78]
1. Mounting Data Suggests that Roundup is More Dangerous than Monsanto-Bayer Claims
Despite Monsanto-Bayer’s continued assertion that Roundup is safe, numerous studies conducted by various organizations and experts worldwide suggest otherwise.[79] In 2015, the World Health Organization published a major study that concluded glyphosate was more carcinogenic to humans than previously reported.[80] This study formed a foundation for and substantiated other, similar claims.[81] Specifically, one expert from the National Institute of Health (NIH) suggested that the EPA was “amazingly wrong” in classifying glyphosate as safe.[82] The NIH scientist claims that the EPA was egregious because they did “not follow[] their own guidelines” when they certified Roundup and the results are “astonishingly incorrect and so amazingly wrong.”[83] Additionally, at least one expert-oncologist has testified to Roundup’s direct causation of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.[84]
However, the issue is complex. Another critical aspect, say victims, is that glyphosate alone is dangerous, but the specific combination of glyphosate (active ingredient) and the proprietary blend of so-called “inert” ingredients that Monsanto-Bayer adds, together, result in greater danger and more severe toxicity complications.[85] Monsanto-Bayer claims that glyphosate can only be absorbed through the skin at less than 1% (a safe rate), but toxicologists claim that Roundup, after Monsanto-Bayer adds the “inert” ingredients, absorbs through the skin at 10% (an unsafe rate).[86] The group that shares this viewpoint is pushing for more truthful and accurate labeling, instructions, and warnings.[87]
2. Monsanto-Bayer Defenses and Claims that Roundup is Safe
In its defense, the Roundup manufacturer claims that the numerous studies finding that glyphosate is carcinogenic are all flawed.[88] In a 2018 trial, a Monsanto-Bayer expert witness, who was paid between $90,000 and $100,000 for her testimony, asserted that there was no reliable statistical connection between glyphosate and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.[89] She referred to nearly half a dozen epidemiology studies that included data on glyphosate, the herbicide's active ingredient.[90] According to her, any apparent link was the result of systemic biases in the data, confounding variables that falsely suggested glyphosate causes cancer, and random chance.[91] During another trial, a different defense expert accused the WHO of “cherry-picking” data to make glyphosate appear more dangerous than it is.[92] Furthermore, Monsanto-Bayer consistently cites an EPA Cancer Assessment Review Committee report from September 2023, which maintains that there is no credible evidence to substantiate that glyphosate is carcinogenic to humans.[93]
3. Considerations Surrounding the Conflicting Data
U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria noted that there is credible evidence on both sides of the scientific debate.[94] He emphasized that uncertainty remains regarding the issue.[95] According to him, the metaphorical jury is still out on whether glyphosate causes non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.[96] While Monsanto-Bayer claims science finding that Roundup is unsafe is faulty, critics claim that the science supporting the safety of Roundup is faulty.[97] Critics illuminate the fact that regulatory agency findings are largely based on studies that are funded by the pesticide registrant, in this case, Monsanto-Bayer.[98] In fact, the Monsanto-Bayer executive in charge of product safety assessment and strategy testified that the company itself funded the large-scale expert panel comprehensive glyphosate study via a third party consultancy entity. [99] When accused of editing the findings from that study in their favor, that same executive claimed they were not editing the studies, they were just “making suggestions” via email.[100] Furthermore, when an independent review claiming glyphosate could cause cancer crossed the former chairman of the EPA Committee’s desk, he “offered to stop” it from publication because his office had published the report claiming that Roundup is not carcinogenic.[101] Separately, in a 2015 email, another EPA official boasted to a Monsanto executive that he “‘should get a medal’ for killing an EPA review of data about possible cancer links that Monsanto opposed.”[102]
On the other hand, jury trials require jurors to grasp technical information to make informed decisions, as seen in the Roundup cases requiring nuanced scientific explanation and testimony.[103] Monsanto asserts that one weakness in relying on these findings is that jurors who lack a technical knowledge base may misinterpret presented science.[104]Furthermore, popular anti-pesticide narratives are easily propagated via social media, a phenomena that Monsanto-Bayer claims predispositions jurors with an unconscious (and sometimes conscious) negativity bias in court cases.[105] In its defense, the company also points to works suggesting that the pivotal WHO study was faulty.[106] Some scholars suggest that the WHO study was flawed in both substantive and procedural methodologies.[107]
4. Calls for Action
Numerous scholars and stakeholders on both sides of the argument have called for policy reform, scientific clarification, and corporate accountability from lawmakers, regulators, and corporate players.[108] Specifically, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has been recommending strengthened governmental pesticide regulation and oversight since at least 2014.[109] One point is that much of the current science is based on glyphosate, and that Roundup – Monsanto-Bayer’s proprietary blend of glyphosate and “inert” ingredients – specifically warrants more thorough, methodological, and objective study.[110] Some authors suggest that even better studies are insufficient and that the agencies that have been put in place based on their expertise and tasked with regulating these substances should step up.[111]
Monsanto started as a chemical company that, over time, evolved into an agricultural and biotechnology corporate giant, effectively controlling a large portion of the world’s food supply.[112] Today, lack of clarity surrounds the safety of the company’s main product, Roundup, and the seeds the company genetically engineered to be resistant to the chemical.[113] Customers claim Roundup caused their cancer; Monsanto maintains that their products are safe.[114] There is controversy regarding the legitimacy of studies relied on by both sides and accusations of misconduct.[115] Numerous calls have been put forth for better regulation, oversight, and accountability.[116]
II. Legal Context & Developments
When a consumer purchases a product from a commercial retailer, the customer is entitled to reasonably trust that the product is fit for the purpose that it is sold for; part of this standard is that the product will not cause injury or disease when used in accordance with the label.[117] Consumers are protected by commercial warranties on a state level in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) at § 2-318 and federally by the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.[118] The Magnuson-Moss Act applies broadly to “a buyer or consumer of any commercial product,” but eligibility for categories of damages is more limited than those available under the UCC.[119]
Conversely, the UCC third-party warranty provision mandates that victims are eligible for more types and higher amounts of damages but eligible claimants are limited to a “person who is in the family or household of the buyer” of the good that caused injury.[120] Further limitations on consumer UCC warranty claims are that the UCC has not been adopted uniformly, and the warranty provisions only serve as default gap-fillers when a sale is void of more specific terms.[121] Lawmakers justify statutory product warranty protections for individual consumers on the premise that most individual consumers lack requisite financial and legal resources to pursue private tort claims against large corporations for injuries caused by their products.[122] Aside from these statutory protections, individual consumers lack avenues for recourse from otherwise liable corporations.[123]
A. David v. Goliath: Consumers Face a Corporate Behemoth
By 2019, 18,400 plaintiffs had filed suits against Monsanto-Bayer, claiming that Roundup caused their cancer and the company should be liable.[124] Claimants allege that the company was aware of the elevated cancer risk since the 1990s but intentionally downplayed the risk by not including a warning label, so consumer-victims thought the product was safe.[125] Since then, thousands more have followed suit – 167,000 more.[126] The following chart presents a summary of recent cases, jurisdictions, and holdings from 2018 through present.[127] In addition to the individual cases presented below, the Northern District of California has consolidated dozens of consumer warranty claims against Monsanto into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) to facilitate efficient proceedings and use of the court’s resources.[128]That court has been processing the MDL since 2016.[129] An in-depth analysis of the MDL is beyond the scope of this work but estimates approximate the total number of cases in the California MDL at over 4,300, with twenty-seven new cases having been added to the MDL in January 2025 alone.[130]
B. Key Observations & Takeaways[165]
Courts are divided.[166] In all of the cases that were analyzed, Monsanto-Bayer has won thirteen cases and lost ten: one case was declared a mistrial, one case was voluntarily dismissed (settled out of court), one case ruled that the EPA was mandated to reevaluate the safety of Roundup, one case is pending still, there was one mistrial, and one court held that state claims were preempted by FIFRA. Although Monsanto-Bayer’s thirteen-to-ten case victory ratio looks promising, even after adjusting for reduced judgments, Monsanto-Bayer is facing legal damages in the hundreds of billions of dollars based on judgments from those ten cases alone. In California, plaintiffs have won three cases, and defense verdicts were handed down for four cases. Of the eight Missouri cases, six returned defense verdicts and two were decided in favor of the plaintiffs. In Pennsylvania, plaintiffs were victorious in four cases and the defense has won three. Elsewhere in Illinois, a mistrial was declared. The lone Louisiana case was decided for Monsanto-Bayer. And, most recently, the Third Circuit held that Federal FIFRA regulations govern labeling claims, not state consumer warranty statutes.
As it stands, pesticide policy is being inconsistently formed and applied in the courts instead of by lawmakers and experts.[167] This form of lawmaking is unethical, inefficient, and impractical.[168] Meanwhile, the Supreme Court refuses to intervene.[169] In recognition of this, in 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stated that “the EPA did not properly justify its findings that glyphosate did not threaten human health and was unlikely to be carcinogenic,” and ordered the agency to formally reevaluate the safety of glyphosate.[170]
C. Monsanto-Bayer Legal Strategies
Bayer (the parent company since the Monsanto-Bayer merger) shareholders are, admittedly, “really fed up,” and the company’s declining share price reflects that.[171] Since the Monsanto-Bayer merger in 2016, Bayer’s share value has declined by 60%.[172] Monsanto-Bayer, further incentivized by average plaintiff payouts ranging from the tens- to hundreds-of-millions of dollars per individual plaintiff in cases that the company loses, is attempting to strategically avoid legal liability in multiple ways.[173] The company is even considering selling off its crop sciences division, which includes Monsanto.[174] Furthermore, and in addition to the two main legal strategies the company is engaging as detailed below, Monsanto-Bayer is also “absurd[ly] and disingenuous[ly]” forum-shopping.[175]
1. Legal Defense: Product Liability Claims Preempted by Federal Regulations
In 2016, Monsanto-Bayer petitioned the court to dismiss a case based on an argument that the plaintiff’s claims were preempted by the Federal FIFRA regulations because the EPA had approved their product label.[176] Those arguments, however, “failed entirely.”[177] While there are instances when a manufacturer can escape liability, the court explained, the claims in the given case did not qualify.[178] The judge reasoned that “[t]he mere fact that the EPA has approved a product label does not prevent a jury from finding that that same label violates FIFRA.”[179] Most recently, however, the Third Circuit held the opposite in Schaffner v. Monsanto, holding that the FIFRA expressly preempts state attempts to regulate pesticide labels.[180]
2. Political Bid for Statutory Legal Immunity
As the company’s viable strategic legal options narrow, Monsanto-Bayer has taken to lobbying lawmakers to pass legislation that would shield the company from legal product liability claims.[181] Though there is some variance in the precise language among the proposed bills, the premise behind all of them is that approval of a label under FIFRA would satisfy any state requirement that a pesticide manufacturer include a cancer risk warning on a product’s label, therefore preempting consumer cancer claims.[182] As of 2024, lawmakers in Iowa, Florida, Missouri, and Idaho had already been targeted.[183] Nearly identical bills were introduced in all three states that year.[184] The language of the bills was supplied by Bayer.[185] It appears the lobbying efforts are succeeding; as of January 2025, two of those states, Florida and Missouri reintroduced the bills for consideration, and new, similar bills have been introduced in Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.[186]
The corporate giants, however, are no strangers to the political lobbying realm. Documents released during a 2019 trial, known as the Monsanto Papers, include a 2015 email exchange that detailed federal government collusion and corruption at the EPA, as well as suspected international lobbying activities.[187] Since 2002, Bayer and Monsanto have collectively poured over $530,000 to further political lobbying efforts in Iowa alone, attempting to spread the message that the lawsuits are driving up the cost of products and disadvantaging farmers.[188] A former Secretary of Agriculture received over $25,000, and the most recent Secretary of Agriculture received almost $20,000. Thus far, however, states have been reluctant to pass the bill.[189] As one Missouri attorney who opposes the legislation explains: “It's just not good government to give a company immunity for things that they're not telling their consumers.”[190] The government influence does not end at politics, however; U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thomas worked for Monsanto for three years prior to commencing his path to the judiciary.[191]
When companies sell their products in the U.S., consumers are protected by warranties that ensure the product is fit to be used for the purpose for which it is being sold when it is used as directed on the product label.[192] These protections provide consumers with recourse if the product causes property damage or harms someone.[193] Over 150,000 consumers are claiming that Roundup caused their cancer, yet the product’s manufacturer claims there is no connection.[194] Courts and juries are divided.[195] Monsanto-Bayer, looking to shirk legal liability and costs, has claimed that liability claims are federally preempted by FIFRA and has intensified its already aggressive lobbying of state politicians and members of the judiciary to try to get state statutory legal immunity from consumer lawsuits.[196]
III. Holding Monsanto-Bayer Consistently Accountable
The case chart above demonstrates that there is a lack of alignment in how the Monsanto-Bayer product liability cases are being decided in the U.S., and decisions are nearly split across jurisdictions. As Monsanto-Bayer’s litigation strategies fail and their legal bills mount, it seems the company’s latest scheme to avoid product liability is to attempt to put politicians in their pockets by aggressively lobbying them for state statutory legal immunity.[197] There is, however, no viable historical foundational basis to grant the company legal immunity. This ploy is purely a desperate political strategy that the company is pursuing because its traditional legal avenues are being exhausted. Monsanto and Bayer have collectively been evading accountability for unethical (illegal) conduct, harmful chemicals and business practices, and experimenting on humans without their consent since at least World War II.[198]
The company’s legal bills are racking up into the billions while its stock value plummets and international organizations declare Roundup is “probably carcinogenic to humans.”[199] Although none of the studies directly assess the carcinogenic levels of Roundup, substantial evidence indicates that Monsanto-Bayer engaged in unethical practices influencing research that deemed glyphosate—the active ingredient in Roundup—safe.[200] This includes funding these studies and “suggesting” edits to their findings.[201]
Additionally, since Roundup has only been on the market for about five decades, the first round of long-term data is only now becoming available – and it looks bleak for Monsanto-Bayer and Roundup.[202] The company has successfully evaded corporate accountability for the damage caused by its hazardous chemical products since well before Roundup and is now so desperate that they are supplying statutory language to state legislators to try to avoid accountability that way. But an opportunity exists now for courts to facilitate justice for the tens of thousands of people who claim that Roundup gave them cancer by focusing on the latest scientific data and uniformly granting relief for Roundup product liability claims. State legislatures should follow suit by declining to protect Monsanto with shielding laws. All Monsanto-Bayer had to do was truthfully and adequately label their product instead of misrepresenting that the product was safe while suppressing information that it was not.
Conclusion
For the aforementioned reasons, in light of public policy, the latest studies, the necessity to protect consumers, and the data analysis herein, as additional Roundup product liability cases inevitably come before courts in various jurisdictions, Monsanto-Bayer should consistently be held liable. The company has produced toxic chemicals for a century and, meanwhile, regularly reported annual profits in the billions of dollars. Fifty years ago, Monsanto introduced Roundup with no long-term data to demonstrate consumer safety. Now, tens of thousands of consumers who purchased Roundup in good faith and used it as instructed, are being diagnosed with a rare form of cancer that they claim was caused by improperly labeled weedkiller and that the manufacturer was aware and intentionally suppressed that information and Monsanto-Bayer claims they are all mistaken. With the right to earn money in the U.S. capitalist free market comes the responsibility to abide by applicable laws and to not cause harm to the public or consumers. Monsanto-Bayer has violated both of those responsibilities – for a century – and it is time for the company to be accountable. In the U.S., you have to pay to play.
[1] See Holly Yan, Patients: Roundup gave us cancer as EPA official helped the company, CNN Health (May 16, 2017, 3:06 PM), https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/15/health/roundup-herbicide-cancer-allegations/index.html.
[2] See CBS News, Former NFL star Merril Hoge opens up about the cancer he believes was caused by Roundup (Aug. 1, 2019, 9:12 AM), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/merril-hoge-former-nfl-player-roundup-weed-killer-lawsuit-speaks-out/.
[3] Id.
[4] See Ruth Bender, How Bayer-Monsanto Became One of the Worst Corporate Deals—in 12 Charts, Wall St. J. (Aug. 28, 2019, 10:12 AM), https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-bayer-monsantobecame-one-of-the-worst-corporate-dealsin-12-charts-11567001577.
[5] See Joseph Mendelson, Roundup: The World’s Biggest-Selling Herbicide, 28 The Ecologist (1998), reprinted at https://www.orpheusweb.co.uk/john.rose/round.html.
[6] See, e.g., id.
[7] See Kali Hays, Monsanto’s FIFRA Stance Can’t Nix Roundup Cancer Suit, Law360 (Apr. 8, 2016, 9:00 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/782423?scroll=1&related=1; see also Leland Glenna & Analena Bruce, Suborning science for profit: Monsanto, glyphosate, and private science research misconduct, 50 Rsch. Pol’y 1, 1 (2021). But see Nathan A. Schachtman, Comment, Reassessing Roundup, 36 Issues Sci. Tech. 9, 10 (2020) (positing that the IARC’s recent classification of Roundup as a “probable carcinogen” was unfounded).
[8] See Glenna & Bruce, supra note 7.
[9] See Susan A. Schneider, Food, Farming, and Sustainability 15 (2nd ed. 2016).
[10] Id.
[11] Id.
[12] Id. at 8–9.
[13] Id. at 14.
[14] See James M. MacDonald, Mergers in Seeds and Agricultural Chemicals: What Happened?, U.S.D.A. Ers (Feb. 15, 2019), https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/february/mergers-in-seeds-and-agricultural-chemicals-what-happened/ (referring to the six main companies as the “Big Six”).
[15] Id.
[16] See GMOs & Seeds, Food & Power, https://www.foodandpower.net/gmos-seeds#:~:text=In%202020%2C%20the%20top%20four,Corteva%20alone%20claiming%20roughly%2040%25 (last visited Apr. 21, 2024).
[17] See Brian Tokar, Monsanto: Origins of an Agribusiness Behemoth, in The Fight Against Monsanto’s Roundup: The Politics of Pesticides(SkyHorse Publishing, 2019) (2018), https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brian-Tokar/publication/329990901_Monsanto_Origins_of_an_Agribusiness_Behemoth/links/5c27d45e458515a4c700ad79/Monsanto-Origins-of-an-Agribusiness-Behemoth.pdf.
[18] See infra subpart C., p. 11.
[19] See infra Chart, pp. 20–23.
[21] Id.
[22] Id.
[23] Id.
[24] Id.
[25] Id.
[26] See Bender, supra note 4.
[27] See Agent Orange: Background on Monsanto’s Involvement, Bus. & Hum. Rts. Res. Ctr. (Apr. 7, 2017), https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/agent-orange-background-on-monsantos-involvement/#:~:text=From%201965%20to%201969%2C%20the%20former%20Monsanto%20Company%20was%20one,and%20how%20it%20was%20used.
[28] See Chris Parker, How Monsanto is Terrifying the Farming World, Mia. New Times (July 25, 2003), https://www.miaminewtimes.com/restaurants/how-monsanto-is-terrifying-the-farming-world-6392824.
[29] See Monsanto, supra note 20.
[30] See Parker, supra note 28.
[31] Id. (explaining that Monsanto acquired Calgene Inc. and DEKALB Genetics, among others).
[32] Id. (explaining that in 2000, Monsanto merged with Pharmacia & Upjohn and then Pharmacia acquired the nonpharmaceutical elements).
[33] Id.
[34] Id.
[35] Id.
[36] See Tokar, supra note 17.
[37] Id.
[38] See Bayer, Encyc. Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bayer (last visited March 27, 2024).
[39] Id. (“This ‘little IG’ was no more than a loose association: member companies remained independent, while dividing production and markets and sharing information.”).
[40] Id. (“In 1925, after protracted legal and fiscal negotiations, the ‘big IG’ was formed: assets of all constituent companies were merged, with all stock being exchanged for BASF shares; BASF, the holding company, changed its name to IG Farbenindustrie AG; headquarters were set up in Frankfurt; and central management was drawn from the executives of all constituent companies.”).
[41] Id.
[42] Id. (explaining that after the war, thirteen company officials were convicted of war crimes).
[43] Id.
[44] Id.
[45] Id.
[46] See Tokar, supra note 17.
[47] See Bayer, supra note 38.
[48] See Carin Smaller, Bayer Tightens Control Over the World’s Food Supply, Int’l Inst. Sustainable Dev. (Sep. 23, 2016), https://www.iisd.org/articles/insight/bayer-tightens-control-over-worlds-food-supply.
[49] Id.; see also Bender, supra note 4.
[50] See Bender, supra note 4.
[51] Id.
[52] Id.
[53] See Parker, supra note 28.
[54] See Schneider, supra note 9, at 553.
[56] See 7 U.S.C. §§ 136–136y.
[57] See EPA, supra note 55.
[58] Id.
[59] See 7 U.S.C. § 136a(c)(2)(A).
[60] See Modernizing the approach to EPA and FDA Oversight of Animal Products Regulated as Pesticides or New Animal Drugs, EPA (Nov. 7, 2023), https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/modernizing-approach-epa-and-fda-oversight-animal-products-regulated-pesticides-or-new#:~:text=Currently%2C%20EPA%20and%20FDA%20determine,1971%20and%20revised%20in%201973.
[61] See U.S. Gov’t Accountability Off., GAO-15-38, Report to the Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives (2014).
[62] See The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, CDC, https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/pesticides/overview.html (last visited Apr. 21, 2024).
[63] Id.
[64] Id.
[65] Id. (listing participating states: California, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, and Washington).
[66] See Sinji Borges Ferreira Tauhata, et al., The glyphosate controversy: an update, 87 Arquivos do Instituto Biologico 1, 2 (2020).
[67] See Parker, supra note 28.
[68] Id.; see also Yan, supra note 1.
[69] See Parker, supra note 28.
[70] Id.
[71] See, e.g., Mendelson, supra note 5, at 1.
[72] See id. at 1.
[73] See id. at 2.
[74] See Dorothy Atkins, Monsanto Owes $289M In Landmark Roundup Cancer Trial, Law360 (Aug. 10, 2018, 6:14 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1071336.
[75] See Parker, supra note 28 (explaining that “[t]oday, Monsanto seeds cover 40 percent of America's crop acres — and 27 percent worldwide. The company makes nearly $8 billion per year”).
[76] See Charles Benbrook, Shining a Light on Glyphosate-Based Herbicide Hazard, Exposures and Risk: Role of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Litigation in the USA, 11:3 Eur. J. Risk Regul. 498, 499 (2020).
[78] See Daniel Fisher, Roundup, talc cases force question: What if juries get the science wrong?, N. Cal. Rec. (July 22, 2019), https://norcalrecord.com/stories/512779047-roundup-talc-cases-force-question-what-if-juries-get-the-science-wrong.
[79] See Mendelson, supra note 5, at 1.
[80] See World Health Org. (WHO), IARC Monographs Volume 112: evaluation of five organophosphate insecticides and herbicides, at 1 (March 20, 2015), https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/MonographVolume112-1.pdf.
[81] See id.
[82] See Cara Bayles, EPA ‘Amazingly Wrong’ On Roundup Cancer Risk, Jury Hears, Law360 (July 13, 2018, 9:32 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1063171/epa-amazingly-wrong-on-roundup-cancer-risk-jury-hears.
[83] Id.
[84] See Cara Bayles, Oncologist Says Roundup Caused Groundskeeper’s Cancer, Law360 (July 20, 2018, 9:01 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1065632?scroll=1.
[85] See Mendelson, supra note 5, at 1 (explaining that RoundUp is comprised of 99.04% “inert” ingredients).
[86] See Dorothy Atkins, Monsanto’s Toxicology Figures Don’t Hold Up, Jury Hears, Law360 (July 26, 2018, 10:55 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1067346/monsanto-s-toxicology-figures-don-t-hold-up-jury-hears.
[87] Id.
[88] See Bayles, supra note 82.
[89] See Dorothy Atkins, Monsanto Expert Rips Studies Linking Herbicide To Cancer, Law360 (July 31, 2018, 9:42 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1068694/monsanto-expert-rips-studies-linking-herbicide-to-cancer.
[90] See id.
[91] See id.
[92] See id.
[93] See Glyphosate, EPA, https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/glyphosate#:~:text=No%20evidence%20that%20glyphosate%20causes,Research%20for%20Cancer%20(IARC) (last visited Apr. 21, 2024); see also Yan, supra note 1.
[94] See Fisher, supra note 78 (explaining his rationale for slashing the amount of jury-awarded damages).
[95] See id.
[96] See id.
[97] See Leland Glenna & Analena Bruce, Suborning science for profit: Monsanto, glyphosate, and private science research misconduct, 50 Rsch. Pol’y 1, 1 (2021).
[98] See Dorothy Atkins, Monsanto Herbicide’s Link To Cancer Sound, Jury Told, Law360 (July 27, 2018, 8:51 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1067701/monsanto-herbicide-s-link-to-cancer-sound-jury-told.
[99] See Cara Salvatore, Monsanto Mgr. Tells Jury Roundup Study Edits ‘Suggestions’, Law360 (Aug. 19, 2022, 11:16 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1522951/monsanto-mgr-tells-jury-roundup-study-edits-suggestions-.
[100] Id.
[101] See Yan, supra note 1.
[102] See Daniel Fisher, When it comes to Roundup and cancer, everybody’s lobbying the regulators, Legal Newsline (Mar. 28, 2019), https://legalnewsline.com/stories/512330617-when-it-comes-to-roundup-and-cancer-everybody-s-lobbying-the-regulators.
[103] See Fisher, supra note 102.
[104] Id.
[105] See Geoffrey Kabat, Who’s Afraid of Roundup, Issues Sci. Tech. 64, 64–65 (Fall 2019).
[106] See Schachtman, supra note 7, at 9.
[107] See id.
[108] See Eva Novotny, Glyphosate, Roundup and the Failures of Regulatory Assessment, Nat’l Inst. Health (June 13, 2022), https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35736929/, reprinted in 10 Toxics 1, 1 (2022), file:///Users/jillapter/Downloads/toxics-10-00321-v5.pdf.
[109] See generally U.S. Gov’t Accountability Off., supra note 61.
[110] See Novotny, supra note 108.
[111] See Marek Cuhra, Review of GMO safety assessment studies: glyphosate residue in Roundup Ready crops is an ignored issue, 27:20 Env’t Sci.’s Eur. 1, 11–12 (2015).
[112] See, e.g., Bayer, supra note 38; see also Monsanto, supra note 20.
[113] See Mendelson, supra note 5, at 1.
[114] See id.
[115] See Fisher, supra note 94.
[116] See, e.g., U.S. Gov’t Accountability Off., supra note 61.
[117] See Daniel Keating, Sales: A Systems Approach, 216 (Rachel E. Barkow, et al. ed., 7th ed. 2020).
[118] See U.C.C. § 2-318; see also 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301–2312.
[119] See 15 U.S.C. § 2301(3).
[120] See U.C.C. § 2-318(A).
[121] See Keating, supra note 117, at 8–9.
[122] See id. at 185.
[123] See id.
[124] See Bender, supra note 4.
[125] See Bayles, supra note 82.
[126] See id; see also Moneywatch, Bayer seeks legal shield from suits claiming Roundup causes cancer, CBS News (Apr. 16, 2024, 7:37 AM), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bayer-roundup-legislation-shield-cancer/.
[127] See infra Chart, pp. 20–23.
[128] See U.S. Dist. Ct., N. Dist. Cali., https://cand.uscourts.gov/judges/chhabria-vince-vc/in-re-roundup-products-liability-litigation-mdl-no-2741/ (last visited Feb. 2, 2025).
[129] See id.
[130] See Roundup Lawsuit [February 2025 Update] – Average Roundup Settlement Per Person, TorHoerman Law, LLC (Jan. 10, 2025), https://www.torhoermanlaw.com/roundup-lawsuit/#:~:text=On%20December%206%2C%202024%2C%20a,challenges%20in%20resolving%20these%20cases.
[131] See Atkins, supra note 74.
[132] See Holly Yan, Jurors give $289 million to a man they say got cancer from Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller, CNN Health (Aug. 11, 2018, 9:28 PM), https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/10/health/monsanto-johnson-trial-verdict/index.html.
[133] See Dorothy Atkins, Monsanto Hit With $80M Verdict in First Fed. Roundup Trial, Law360 (Mar. 27, 2019), https://www.law360.com/articles/1143544; see also Hardeman v. Monsanto Co., Nos. 19-16636 & 19-16708 (9th Cir. May 14, 2021), https://www.law360.com/articles/1385003/attachments/0.
[134] See Holly Yan, A cancer patient who defeated Monsanto in federal court just got his award slashed by $55 million, CNN Health (July 16, 2019, 12:01 PM), https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/16/health/monsanto-roundup-1st-federal-trial-award-reduced/index.html.
[135] See Pilliod v. Monsanto Co., No. A158228 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2021), https://www.law360.com/articles/1411190/attachments/0.
[136] See Hailey Konnath, Monsanto Snags Its 1st Jury Win In A Roundup Trial, Law360 (Oct. 5, 2021), https://www.law360.com/articles/1428577.
[137] See generally Stephens v. Monsanto, Justice Pesticides, https://justicepesticides.org/en/juridic_case/stephens-v-monsanto/ (last visited Feb. 15, 2024).
[138] See Shelton v. Monsanto Co., No. 1816-CV17026 (Cir. Mo. June 10, 2022), https://www.law360.com/articles/1501501/attachments/0.
[139] See Bonnie Eslinger, Bayer Notches 4th Trial Win Over Roundup Weedkiller, Law360 (June 17, 2022, 10:02 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1504211/bayer-notches-4th-trial-win-over-roundup-weedkiller.
[140] See NRDC v. EPA, No. 20-70787 (9th Cir. June 17, 2022), https://assets.law360news.com/1504000/1504102/glysophate.pdf.
[141] See Bonnie Eslinger, 9th Circ. Tells EPA to Reevaluate Glyphosate’s Cancer Risk, Law360 (June 17, 2022, 7:25 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1504102/9th-circ-tells-epa-to-reevaluate-glyphosate-s-cancer-risk. See also NRDC v. EPA, No. 20-70787 (9th Cir. June 17, 2022), https://www.law360.com/articles/1504102/attachments/0.
[142] See Cara Salvatore, Monsanto Gets Fast Win In St. Louis Roundup Trial, Law360 (Sep. 1, 2022, 8L48 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1526852.
[143] See generally Juliette Fairley, Roundup plaintiff plans appeal of local judge’s directed verdict in favor of Monsanto, St. Louis Rec. (Sep. 28, 2023), https://stlrecord.com/stories/649739789-roundup-plaintiff-plans-appeal-of-local-judge-s-directed-verdict-in-favor-of-monsanto.
[144] See Cara Salvatore, Monsanto Wins Roundup Trial Brought By Gardener, Law360 (May 23, 2023, 10:30 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1680580.
[145] See Cara Salvatore, Monsanto Wins Directed Verdict In Missouri Roundup Trial, Law360 (Sep. 28, 2023, 4:25 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1726838.
[146] See Brendan Pierson, Bayer must pay $1.25 million in Roundup cancer trial, jury finds, Reuters (Oct. 20, 2023), https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/bayer-must-pay-125-mln-roundup-cancer-trial-jury-finds-2023-10-20/.
[147] Note that this is the author’s birthday, so this victory is extra special.
[148] See George Woolston, Monsanto Hit With $175M Verdict In 1st Philly Roundup Trial, Law360 (Oct. 31, 2023, 6:27 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1737701/.
[149] See generally Dennis v. Monsanto Co., No. 37-2021-00047326-CU-PO-NC (Sup. Ct. Cal. filed Nov. 5, 2021), https://www.law360.com/articles/1739078/attachments/0.
[150] See Tom Hals, Bayer ordered to pay $1.56 billion in latest US trial loss over Roundup weedkiller, Reuters (Nov. 20, 2023, 11:50 am), https://www.reuters.com/legal/bayer-ordered-pay-156-billion-latest-us-trial-loss-over-roundup-weedkiller-2023-11-19/.
[151] See id.
[152] See id.
[153] See Martel v. Monsanto Co., No. 000084 (Phila. Cnty. Ct. Sep. 2021), https://www.law360.com/articles/1773827/attachments/0.
[154] See generally Jones v. Monsanto, Law360, https://www.law360.com/cases/65eb57b43f5717f23c33e7e1/dockets (last visited Feb. 15, 2025) (detailing the complex case docket history).
[155] See P.J. D’Annunzio, Monsanto Hit With $2.25B Verdict In Philly Roundup Trial, Law360 (Jan. 26, 2024), https://www.law360.com/articles/1787396/.
[156] See Randall Chase, Mistrial declared in Delaware lawsuit blaming landscaper’s cancer on use of Roundup weedkiller, AP (Mar. 1, 2024, 5:28 PM), https://apnews.com/article/roundup-weedkiller-bayer-monsanto-cancer-f34759d9dda15e51e947c84f3bd96104.
[157] See generally Green v. Monsanto, Law360, https://www.law360.com/cases/66217a772532c50333241aaa/dockets (last visited Feb. 15, 2025) (detailing the complex case docket history).
[158] See Kline v. Monsanto Co., No. 01641 (Phila. Cnty. Ct. Feb. 2022), https://www.law360.com/articles/1809827/attachments/0.
[159] See Colin Atagi, Sebastopol farmer drops lawsuit against Roundup manufacturer, Press Democrat (Mar. 5, 2024), https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/news/sebastopol-farmer-drops-lawsuit-against-roundup-manufacture/.
[160] See generally https://www.law360.com/cases/65c25ebd002e3002a410afac/dockets.
[161] See Schaffner v. Monsanto Corp., 113 F.4th 364, 399–400 (3d Cir. 2024).
[162] See Statement on Young, Bayer Glob. (Sep. 16, 2024), https://www.bayer.com/en/litigation-statement/young.
[163] See Statement on Melissen, Bayer Glob. (Oct. 11, 2024), https://www.bayer.com/en/litigation-statement/melissen.
[164] See Statement on Womack, Bayer Glob. (Nov. 18, 2024), https://www.bayer.com/en/litigation-statement/womack.
[165] Note that statements in this section are the author’s assertions based on data presented in the case chart, with the exception of specifically footnoted statements.
[166] See supra, Chart, pp. 20-23.
[167] See Valerie J. Watnick, The “Roundup” Controversy: Glyphosate Litigation, Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, and Lessons for Toxics Regulation Going Forward, 30 N.Y.U. Env’t L.J. 1, 45–48 (2022).
[168] Id.
[169] See Moneywatch, Supreme Court rejects Bayer bid to block Roundup lawsuits, CBS News (June 21, 2022, 11:02 AM), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-rejects-bayer-bid-to-stop-roundup-lawsuits/; see also Lawrence Hurley, U.S. Supreme Court rejects Bayer bid to nix Roundup weedkiller suits, Reuters (June 21, 2022, 2:57 PM), https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-rejects-bayer-bid-nix-roundup-weedkiller-suits-2022-06-21/.
[170] See Jonathan Stempel, U.S. EPA ordered to reassess glyphosate’s impact on health, environment, Reuters (June 17, 2022, 5:23 PM), https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-agency-ordered-reassess-glyphosates-impact-health-environment-2022-06-17/.
[171] See Maureen Farrell, Years After Monsanto Deal, Bayer’s Roundup Bills Keep Piling Up, N.Y. Times (Dec. 6, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/06/business/monsanto-bayer-roundup-lawsuit-settlements.html?searchResultPosition=3.
[172] See id.
[173] See Benbrook, supra note 76, at 506 (calculating the average payout per plaintiff in the Johnson, Hardeman, and Pilliod cases at ranging between $606.2 million based on jury award and $47.6 million court-adjusted average).
[174] See Farrell, supra note 170.
[175] See Cara Salvatore, Monsanto Can’t Move Roundup Trials, Mo. High Court Hears, Law360 (Apr. 21, 2023, 10:23 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/1599907/monsanto-can-t-move-roundup-trials-mo-high-court-hears.
[176] See Kali Hays, Monsanto’s FIFRA Stance Can’t Nix Roundup Cancer Suit, Law360 (Apr. 8, 2016, 9:00 PM), https://www.law360.com/articles/782423?scroll=1&related=1.
[177] See id.
[178] See id.
[179] See id.
[180] See Schaffner v. Monsanto Corp., 113 F.4th 364, 399–400 (3d Cir. 2024).
[181] See Moneywatch, Bayer seeks legal shield from suits claiming Roundup causes cancer, CBS News (Apr. 16, 2024, 7:37 AM), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bayer-roundup-legislation-shield-cancer/.
[182] See Brigit Rollins, States Introduce Pesticide Liability Limitation Bills in 2025 Legislative Session, Nat’l Agric. L. Ctr. (Jan. 28, 2025) https://nationalaglawcenter.org/states-introduce-pesticide-liability-limitation-bills-in-2025-legislative-session/#:~:text=While%20the%202025%20session%20for,Specifically%2C%20HB%20129%20provides%20that:.
[183] See id.
[184] See id.
[185] See id.
[186] See Rollins, supra note 181.
[187] See Daniel Fisher, When it comes to Roundup and cancer, everybody’s lobbying the regulators, Legal Newsline (Mar. 28, 2019), https://legalnewsline.com/stories/512330617-when-it-comes-to-roundup-and-cancer-everybody-s-lobbying-the-regulators.
[188] See Ty Rushing, Bayer/Monsanto has poured money into Iowa politics for years, Iowa Starting Line (Apr. 8, 2024), https://iowastartingline.com/2024/04/08/bayer-monsanto-has-poured-money-into-iowa-politics-for-years/.
[189] See id.
[190] Id.
[191] See Scott W. Stern, The Justice from Monsanto: The Environmental Life and Law of Clarence Thomas, 46 Harv. Env’t L. Rev. 67, 70 (2022).
[192] See Keating, supra note 117, at 216.
[193] See id.
[194] See Bayles, supra note 82.
[195] See Chart, supra pp. 17–19.
[196] See Moneywatch, supra note 168.
[197] See Moneywatch, supra note 180.
[198] See Bayer, supra note 38 (explaining that after the war, thirteen company officials were convicted of war crimes).
[199] See, e.g., Bayer, Annual Report 2023, at 3, https://www.bayer.com/sites/default/files/2024-03/bayer-annual-report-2023.pdf (last visited Apr. 22, 2024). See also, e.g., Farrell, supra note 170.
[200] See generally Atkins, supra note 86.
[201] See Salvatore, supra note 99.
[202] See Benbrook, supra note 76, at 506 (allowing one to infer that the outlook is bleak because the legal fees are tracing to the hundreds of millions of dollars).