\n<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON — <\/span>The Supreme Court sided with the maker of the Roundup weedkiller Thursday in a ruling expected to block thousands of lawsuits alleging it failed to warn people the product could cause cancer.<\/p>\n The case came before the justices after a tidal wave of litigation<\/a> that included some multibillion-dollar verdicts<\/a> against the global agrochemical manufacturer Bayer, which acquired Roundup when it bought its original manufacturer Monsanto in 2018.<\/p>\n The decision is a victory for the Trump administration, but one that could be tricky politically since allies in the Make America Healthy Again<\/a> movement want to rein in pesticide use.<\/p>\n The high court<\/a> found that the company can\u2019t be sued in state courts because federal regulations have found a cancer link unlikely.<\/p>\n The case before the court<\/a> was filed by Missouri resident John Durnell. He developed a cancer called non-Hodgkin\u2019s lymphoma after more than 20 years of serving as the neighborhood association\u2019s \u201cspray guy,\u201d using Roundup on parks in his historic St. Louis community.<\/p>\n A jury agreed that the company failed to warn him about possible cancer dangers and awarded him $1.25 million. It\u2019s one of thousands of similar cases, including some multibillion-dollar damage awards.<\/p>\n There\u2019s still fierce debate about cancer and Roundup\u2019s key ingredient, glyphosate. The World Health Organization\u2019s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified the chemical as \u201cprobably carcinogenic\u201d in 2015. The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that it\u2019s not likely to cause cancer in humans when used as directed.<\/p>\n The agency approved a label without a cancer warning, and Bayer argues that it\u2019s required to follow those federal standards \u2014 not the state laws that Durnell and others have sued under. The ruling could allow other suits alleging problems with the way the product was designed, his attorney Ashley Keller has said. <\/p>\n Bayer disputes the cancer claims but previously set aside $16 billion to settle cases, and earlier this year proposed a $7.25 billion class-action settlement to resolve many of the remaining claims. A federal judge recently ruled that the proposed settlement will be heard in a Missouri state court, where many of the lawsuits have been filed. At the same time, the company has tried to persuade states to pass laws shielding it from liability<\/a> in failure-to-warn lawsuits, and three states have agreed. <\/p>\n About 200,000 Roundup-related claims have been made against Bayer, mostly from home users. It has stopped using glyphosate in Roundup sold in the U.S. residential lawn and garden market.<\/p>\n The company has said it might have to consider pulling glyphosate from U.S. agricultural markets if it keeps getting sued. Agricultural industry group say could have a devastating effect on the food supply.<\/p>\n But pesticides have also created a rift between the Trump administration and members of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy\u2019s MAHA movement, adding to their frustration with an executive order aimed at boosting glyphosate\u2019s production.<\/p>\n Kennedy himself has said repeatedly that glyphosate causes cancer, even as he says he recognizes the executive order was necessary for food supply and national security reasons.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n