US Supreme Court to hear Durnell v. Monsanto case

The United States Supreme Court has decided to hear the case Durnell v. Monsanto, currently a subsidiary of Bayer. The company filed its appeal with the court in April 2025. The ruling will address the divergence among federal courts regarding the application of federal preemption in the litigation involving the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup.

Technically, the judges will answer the following question: "whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act precludes a claim of failure to provide a warning based on the label, in cases where the EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) has not required the warning."

Bayer has stated that it expects a decision on the merits by June of this year. The company's CEO, Bill Anderson, said the decision also represents progress in Bayer's strategy to contain the litigation.

The Supreme Court had already requested an opinion from the U.S. Attorney General. In December, the government representative, John Sauer, agreed with the need for a review of the case. In his petition, Sauer argued that upholding the Durnell case decision would allow juries to disregard the EPA's (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) technical analyses of glyphosate safety.

Sauer argued that the EPA repeatedly approved Roundup labels without warnings about cancer. He believes the preemption provision in the Federal Insecticides, Fungicides, and Rodenticides Act (FIFRA) must be respected. The Attorney General also warned of the risk that manufacturers will face conflicting requirements across the 50 U.S. states.

Monsanto argues that the division among federal courts necessitates a unified position from the Supreme Court. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the Schaffner case that FIFRA prevents lawsuits based on allegations of failure to provide warning under state law. However, the Ninth and Eleventh Circuit Courts, as well as the Missouri Court of Appeals, have ruled otherwise.

The Durnell case was tried in October 2023 in St. Louis, Missouri. The jury dismissed two charges and refused to award punitive damages. However, it found that the company failed to warn about alleged product risks and awarded $1,25 million in damages. The company appealed in August 2024. In February 2025, the appeals court upheld the conviction. The Missouri Supreme Court declined to review the case. Monsanto then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in April.