The cited record supports the material proposition.
The US Supreme Court held in June 2026 that federal pesticide law preempts a Missouri Roundup user's failure-to-warn claim against Monsanto.
- About
- Bayer AG
- Claim made by
- Supreme Court of the United States, court filing
- Published
- 25 June 2026
- Evidence score
- 95 How it was scored
- Last reviewed
- 25 October 2026
Why this label
The slip opinion states the holding directlyS3. A jury had awarded the plaintiff more than US$1 million on a failure-to-warn theory, and the Missouri appellate ruling was reversed and remandedS3. Justice Kavanaugh wrote for seven justices. Justice Jackson dissented, joined by Justice GorsuchS3. The Court reasoned that the claim would require Monsanto to add a cancer warning to the Roundup label, which federal law does not allow states to requireS3. The ruling is about preemption of labeling claims. It does not decide whether glyphosate causes cancer, and it does not end the separate class settlement process in MissouriS5.
Current procedural position
Decided by the US Supreme Court on 25 June 2026, reversed and remandedS3. Further proceedings on remand not checked.
Record supporting the assessment
Held: FIFRA expressly preempts Durnell’s state-law failure-to-warn claim
707 S. W. 3d 828, reversed and remanded.
A jury agreed and awarded Durnell more than $1 million on the failure-to-warn theory.
Conflicting or limiting record
No record located that conflicts with this assessment.
Evidence score: 95 of 100
The score grades how well the record establishes this assessment. It is not a score of Bayer AG. Score = source authority + directness + corroboration + procedural accuracy + currency + reproducibility.
| Component | Points | Max | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Source authorityIs the source competent to establish the proposition? | 30 | 30 | A Supreme Court opinion is the highest authority on US federal preemption. |
| DirectnessDoes the source state the proposition or only discuss adjacent facts? | 20 | 20 | The syllabus states the holding in one sentence. |
| CorroborationDo independent records support the same material point? | 12 | 15 | Bayer's later litigation statements are consistent, but no second court record was read. |
| Procedural accuracyDoes the record settle the procedural state the claim describes? | 14 | 15 | The ruling is final on the federal question, with remand proceedings left. |
| CurrencyHas the record been checked against later developments? | 9 | 10 | Checked for later developments through Bayer's September 2026 statement. |
| ReproducibilityCan a reader locate the passage and repeat the assessment? | 10 | 10 | The opinion is on supremecourt.gov. |
| Total | 95 | 100 |
Timeline
- Supreme Court reverses the Missouri judgment, 7-2S3
Related cases
- Monsanto Company v. DurnellSupreme Court of the United States. Civil. 24-1068.Stage: Decided on 25 June 2026. Missouri judgment reversed and remanded.
- FIFRA preempts the state-law failure-to-warn claim, judgment reversed and remanded, 7-2S3
Revision history
- Assessment first published with label Supported.
Have a record that changes this assessment? See corrections and responses.
Sources
- S3Tier A Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, No. 24-1068, slip opinionSupreme Court of the United States. Court judgment. 25 June 2026.Holds that FIFRA preempts the failure-to-warn claim. It does not decide whether glyphosate causes cancer.Link working, checked 25 October 2026
- S5Tier B Roundup™ LitigationBayer. Company statement. 11 August 2026, modified 17 September 2026.Company statement that the final approval hearing took place on 14 September 2026 and the decision will come later. It does not report a ruling.
Other claims about Bayer AG
- Unresolved66Plaintiffs in US Roundup lawsuits have claimed that exposure to the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup causes non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans.Court filing, 25 June 20264 records citedProduct claims
- Partly supported77Monsanto said in February 2026 that regulators, including the US EPA and EU bodies, conclude that glyphosate-based herbicides can be used safely and are not carcinogenic.Company statement, 17 February 20264 records citedProduct claims
- Outdated86The US EPA's February 2020 interim registration review decision found that glyphosate is unlikely to be a human carcinogen.Regulator statement, February 20203 records citedProduct claims
- Unresolved67Monsanto said in February 2026 that a class settlement of up to US$7.25 billion would resolve current and future Roundup claims tied to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.Company statement, 17 February 20265 records citedCorporate status