Does a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision affect how Minnesota can warn of pesticide health dangers?

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Monsanto v. Durnell bars Minnesota and other states from labeling pesticides with health warnings different from the federal government’s.

The case, decided on June 25, stemmed from Missouri farmer John Durnell’s lawsuit claiming that he’d developed cancer after using Monsanto’s Roundup.

Missouri has a “strict liability” doctrine holding companies accountable for failing to warn about the dangerous nature of a product. On those grounds, a Missouri jury awarded $1.25 million to Durnell.

An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court resulted in justices ruling 7-2 against Durnell. States cannot impose warnings “in addition to or different from” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requirements, justices concluded.

Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, is widely used in Minnesota agriculture. Although the Minnesota Department of Health and EPA don’t consider it carcinogenic at likely exposure concentrations, the World Health Organization deems it “probably carcinogenic to humans.”