At the center of the dispute is whether EPA approval of Roundup labels that do not include a cancer warning prevents state juries from imposing different or additional warning requirements. Bayer has framed the Supreme Court review as crucial to containing sprawling litigation. A Supreme Court ruling that finds FIFRA preempts state failure-to-warn claims would likely reduce settlement pressure and reserve requirements, improving Bayer’s near-term financial outlook and potentially narrowing liability for other pesticide manufacturers. Reports note that the current Solicitor General filed a brief supporting Supreme Court review, reversing a prior administration’s stance and aligning the executive branch with Bayer’s call for resolution. Agricultural groups including the American Farm Bureau Federation have filed in support of Bayer, warning that curtailing glyphosate would disrupt modern farming.

Source: ABC News January 17, 2026 06:00 UTC