Roundup Lawsuits Suffer Blow Following Major Win for Bayer in Pennsylvania Appeals Court
Editors carefully fact-check all Drugwatch.com content for accuracy and quality.
Drugwatch.com has a stringent fact-checking process. It starts with our strict sourcing guidelines.
We only gather information from credible sources. This includes peer-reviewed medical journals, reputable media outlets, government reports, court records and interviews with qualified experts.
In a potential blow to plaintiffs who have filed Roundup lawsuits, an appeals court has ruled in favor of Bayer in a case over whether its subsidiary Monsanto failed to warn customers about cancer risks associated with its weed killer.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia delivered a unanimous ruling in Schaffner v. Monsanto Corporation. The court determined that the company did not have to abide by a state law that plaintiffs claim it violated by not placing cancer warning labels on Roundup.
The ruling hinged on the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which regulates pesticides like Roundup. That law prohibits states from including labeling requirements that are different from or go beyond the scope of FIFRA.
The court found that Pennsylvania law was not equivalent to what FIFRA requires and was, therefore, preempted by it.
This is a notable change from previous decisions in Roundup lawsuits. Thursday’s ruling overturned what had been a win for David and Theresa Schaffner, who filed a lawsuit over David’s development of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2006 following regular exposure to Roundup as a professional landscaper.
The judge overseeing the Roundup multidistrict litigation in the Northern District of California also ruled in similar cases that FIFRA does not preempt state law. The differing judgments could lead Roundup cases to the Supreme Court, a direction that Bayer has pushed for.
“This decision on federal preemption, a cross-cutting issue in this litigation, creates a circuit split among the federal appellate courts and necessitates a review by the U.S. Supreme Court to settle this important issue of law,” Bayer said in a statement. “The Company is considering the impact of this ruling on other pending litigation and looks forward to presenting its arguments, as fully embraced by the Third Circuit, to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
What This Ruling Means for Active Roundup Lawsuits
Last week’s ruling is a potential setback for some existing Roundup litigation against Monsanto and Bayer.
Plaintiffs had seen success in recent years, with five wins in 2023 and a January ruling that awarded a Pennsylvania man $2.25 billion – later reduced to $400 million – over his claim that Roundup caused his non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
But the tide had seemed to turn a bit in recent months. In July, the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas upheld Bayer’s only winning trial verdict in that court. The company also began focusing lobbying efforts on adding language to the potential federal Farm Bill that could limit future Roundup litigation.
Now, this new ruling may cause issues for lawsuits that claim Monsanto failed to warn that Roundup could be linked to cancer. Since the appeals court ruled that FIFRA preempts state law, cases relying on state regulations that differ from or expand upon FIFRA may have more difficulty achieving success.
The conflicting rulings may also lead to a potential Supreme Court showdown, which has been a goal of Bayer’s. The company outlined a favorable Supreme Court ruling as the first step in its five-point plan to manage Roundup litigation.
Roundup’s Alleged Link to Cancer at Center of Ongoing Litigation
Litigation against Monsanto and Bayer has centered on whether Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate cause cancer.
Some studies have linked the popular pesticide to the development of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, with the International Agency for Research on Cancer classifying glyphosate as a possible human carcinogen in 2015.
Lawsuits have focused on the weed killer’s potential links to cancer and Monsanto’s failure to warn of those links.
Despite last week’s ruling, plaintiffs have seen notable successes in litigation. In 2020, Monsanto agreed to an $11 billion settlement to settle most Roundup cases, but many more remain active.
As of August 2024, more than 4,300 Roundup cases are pending in multidistrict litigation in California federal court.