U.S. Supreme Court weighs Bayer liability in pesticide cancer lawsuit

The pesticide maker Bayer argued in front of the U.S. Supreme Court Monday that it should not be held legally liable if its products are found to be carcinogens.

The decision could potentially limit the ability of individuals to sue pesticide manufacturers, and advocates worry about the implications of the case setting a nationwide precedent.

Dani Replogle, a senior attorney with Food and Water Watch, said the court’s decision could override state-level protections if it sides with Bayer.

“If Bayer wins this lawsuit, then all the work that we’ve done on the ‘Cancer Gag Act’ will be futile,” Replogle said. “Because those lawsuits will be preempted at the federal level, and the right to sue at the state level will be no longer available for cancer patients.”

Bayer argues that its products meet safety and labeling standards of the Environmental Protection Agency. In Georgia, a law was passed in 2025 that took effect in January that limits some lawsuits brought against pesticide makers.

Although the EPA has not declared whether certain substances cause cancer, Replogle said research suggests potential risks exist with exposure, including results from the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

“The bricks that were propping up this idea that glyphosate is safe and noncarcinogenic are starting to fall,” Replogle said.

The court’s decision could have extended impacts on farmers, consumers and agricultural communities as well as reshape how states handle pesticide-related lawsuits.