If you have been following the national agricultural news lately, beyond discussions on policy, there has been a focus on states’ legislatures considering “Crop Protection” legislation. This liability protection would extend to companies producing federally approved pesticides.
We have all seen the news of large settlements from users of federally approved pesticides claiming linkages between their use and cancer. The biggest of these lawsuits is the Roundup litigation. To date, Bayer has paid roughly $10 billion to settle claims that Roundup has caused cancer. At the same time, class actions have been filed against Syngenta, the manufacturer of Paraquat, for claims that the product causes Parkinson’s Disease. Finally, AMVAC Chemical Corporation has been sued due to claims that Dacthal (DCPA) has caused birth defects.
The debate on Crop Protection legislation concerns this type of litigation. Under the legislation being proposed in several states, as long as the federally approved pesticide includes a label with the most recent human health assessment required under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) or a label containing consistent with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) carcinogenicity classification for the pesticide required under FIFRA this would be a sufficient warning label. Under the legislation, this label would be enough to meet the duty to warn under state law. This would severely limit the ability for users to sue later for alleged health issues (such as cancer or Parkinson’s Disease).
This legislation has been signed into law in North Dakota, and as of the writing of this article, it has passed the Georgia legislature and has not been signed by the Governor. Similar legislation is currently before the legislatures in Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Tennessee.
Georinger, Paul. “What is Crop Protection Legislation.” Southern Ag Today 5(20.5). May 16, 2025. Permalink
