10.24.25

Myth-Fact: Section 453 of the Interior Appropriations Bill

MYTH: Sec. 453 says the EPA can not change its determination about whether the chemical causes cancer, unless the EPA does a whole new study from scratch.   

  • FACT: Sec. 453 simply reaffirms the existing framework previously passed by Congress under FIFRA making EPA the sole authority regarding pesticide labeling and packaging requirements. 
  • FACT: EPA regularly re-reviews all new information to ensure the safety and efficacy of the product for use as directed. 
  • FACT: Manufacturers are consistently studying the safety and efficacy of their products and innovations. Manufacturers are mandated under federal law to report any adverse health effects raised during that process to the EPA. 
  • FACT: Once a pesticide reaches the market, EPA scientists continue to review all new studies to guarantee the safety of existing products. This system works—for example, in August 2023, regulators pulled the registration of a pesticide after continuing to examine new information. 

MYTH: Chemical companies can fight EPA's health assessments, hide evidence, try to manipulate the science all over again, sue over the final assessment, and delay or overturn its findings.

  • FACT: Manufacturers are consistently studying the safety and efficacy of their products and innovations. Manufacturers are mandated under federal law to report any adverse health effects raised during that process to the EPA and are prohibited by law from falsifying results. EPA reviews all new information to ensure the safety and efficacy of products when used as directed.  

MYTH: Section 453 would make it impossible for states to protect people by holding companies legally accountable for failing to warn against harm. Because federal law overrides state law when it is impossible to comply with both, chemical companies will argue that any case against them must be dismissed because it’s contrary to the mandate in section 453. 

  • FACT: Sec. 453 would not impact any current or future litigation. Nor does it change the meaning of the law. This provision simply reinforces existing federal law making EPA the sole authority on pesticide labeling and packaging requirements.
  • FACT: This provision does not cede a state’s authority to regulate pesticides to the EPA; states can still regulate the sale and use of any pesticides within their borders.   

MYTH: Section 453 would mean that manufacturers can't warn that glyphosate causes cancer on the label.

  • FACT: Adding a false label inconsistent with EPA’s findings and conclusions—not to mention EFSA, ECHA, and all other leading safety and regulatory bodies around the world—would constitute misbranding and would violate federal law. The EPA decides what content goes on the label.
  • FACT: Glyphosate has been deemed safe to use as directed by U.S. and global health regulators, including the EU and Canada, for over 50 years. It’s one of the most extensively researched herbicides in the world, with more than 1,500 studies backing up its safety, and it continues to be an EPA-approved product. 
  • FACT: In 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found California’s Prop 65 cancer warning for glyphosate to be unconstitutional.

MYTH: Bayer wants this language so they can't be held legally responsible when people get cancer.

  • FACT: Sec. 453 does not have a direct impact on any current or future litigation, nor does it change the meaning of the law. It simply reaffirms Congress’ intent that states cannot require labels on products that are “different from or in addition to” what is required under FIFRA, which includes determinations made by the EPA. 

MYTH: The most recent health assessment attempt was thrown out by a court in 2022 because the EPA violated its own cancer guidelines and improperly downplayed studies linking glyphosate to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

  • FACT: This decision is related purely to documentation/process regarding the EPA’s reasoning, not the safety of the product. The EPA has repeatedly reaffirmed that glyphosate is not carcinogenic, consistent with reviews by regulators worldwide, including the EU, as recently as 2023. 
  • FACT: EPA maintains its “underlying scientific findings regarding glyphosate, including its finding that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans, remain the same.”

MYTH: Sec. 453 ties the EPA's hands and gives companies a free pass not to address emerging risks to public health, regardless of emerging science and health data.

  • FACT: Sec. 453 simply reaffirms the existing framework previously passed by Congress under FIFRA making EPA the sole authority regarding pesticide labeling and packaging requirements.
  • FACT: As a part of this authority, EPA regularly re-reviews all new information to ensure the safety and efficacy of the product for use as directed.  
  • FACT: Manufacturers are consistently studying the safety and efficacy of their products and innovations. Manufacturers are mandated under federal law to report any adverse health effects raised during that process to the EPA. 
  • FACT: Once a pesticide reaches the market, EPA scientists continue to review all new studies to guarantee the safety of existing products. This system works—in August, 2023, regulators pulled the registration of a pesticide after continuing to examine new information. 

MYTH: Sec. 453 would give immunity to ChemChina, a Chinese military-controlled pesticide giant. 

  • FACT: This legislation would not impact any current or future litigation.
  • FACT: In fact, many Chinese pesticide manufacturers are effectively shielded from U.S. product liability litigation because they often lack U.S.-based assets, and Chinese courts do not enforce U.S. judgments, making it nearly impossible to recover damages.

MYTH: Section 453 would block EPA enforcement of FIFRA misbranding rules and prevent the EPA from approving updated pesticide warnings when new health risks emerge, letting companies sell dangerous products while claiming federal approval. 

  • FACT: This is false. This provision reinforces FIFRA and this bill maintains the status quo, which is that the EPA is the sole authority on pesticide labeling and packaging requirements.
  • FACT: This provision would not impact any current or future litigation.
  • FACT: Nothing in this legislation would prohibit the EPA from updating its conclusions regarding health and safety of products regulated under FIFRA.

MYTH: Sec. 453 means that courts would have no choice but to find for the chemical company. 

  • FACT: This provision would not impact any current or future litigation.

MYTH: Section 453 would codify Monsanto's defense by prohibiting the EPA from approving any request to add a cancer warning to Roundup. 

  • FACT: This provision does not impact any current or future litigation, nor does it change the meaning of the law. 

MYTH: Bayer/Monsanto has asked every court in which it has ever appeared to throw out pesticide cases based on the general argument that "EPA has never told us to add a cancer warning." In fact, it is asking SCOTUS to do this right now after losing that argument in the Missouri Supreme Court. Multiple courts have made it clear that this isn't a valid defense because Bayer/Monsanto never asked the EPA for a cancer warning on Roundup, much less been denied one. 

  • FACT: This is also a mischaracterization. Bayer has repeatedly maintained that it stands behind the safety of glyphosate when used as directed. 
  • FACT: EPA has repeatedly found that glyphosate does not cause cancer, and therefore has never mandated a cancer warning label. This is a finding supported by more than 1,500 scientific studies and every leading health regulator in the world.
  • FACT: Furthermore, other courts have found that FIFRA preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims concerning pesticides.