WHAT THEY ARE SAYING: Farm Groups Applaud Supreme Court Decision on Crop Protection Tools
OMAHA, Neb. — The Modern Ag Alliance and its more than 115 partners are applauding the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, which provides needed certainty for farmers who rely on trusted, EPA-approved crop protection tools.
The Court’s 7-2 decision reinforces the importance of a consistent, science-based labeling framework that farmers and the broader agricultural supply chain depend on each season.
Here’s what they are saying:
—
National
Elizabeth Burns-Thompson, Executive Director, Modern Ag Alliance: “Farmers are already facing tight margins, rising input costs and constant uncertainty. Today’s decision protects access to the tools growers rely on to manage weeds, protect yields and keep food affordable. Farmers trust EPA’s rigorous review process and federally approved labels to make safe, predictable decisions on their farms. A confusing patchwork of state-level warning requirements would only make a hard job harder.”
Daren Coppock, President & CEO, Agricultural Retailers Association: “This decision protects the entire agricultural supply chain. When ag retailers and applicators comply fully with an EPA-approved label, they should not be punished for following the law. The Court’s ruling ensures that pesticide safety decisions remain grounded in science, exactly as Congress intended when it passed FIFRA,”
American Soybean Association: “Farmers depend on clear, consistent labeling and a uniform regulatory framework to use pesticides safely and responsibly. The Supreme Court’s decision provides much-needed clarity on the role of federal, science-based regulation and reaffirms the value of sound science in the regulatory process. For decades, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, along with regulatory authorities around the world, has repeatedly concluded that glyphosate does not pose a cancer risk when used as directed. State-level requirements have led to a burdensome regulatory patchwork that conflicts with EPA-approved labels and creates confusion, undermining confidence in the regulatory process and limiting access to essential crop protection tools.”
Independent Professional Seed Association: “[This decision is a] very positive development for every farmer and person in Agriculture. The Supreme Court got it right – the EPA must have jurisdiction in this area, and no one should be held liable for following Federal Law.”
Sam Kieffer, CEO, National Association of Wheat Growers: “This decision is a win for farmers and the broader agricultural community. Farmers depend on clear, predictable, science-based regulations and continued access to effective crop protection tools. Today’s decision reaffirms that EPA’s label, based on a rigorous process of scientific review, is the law. NAWG continues to support a regulatory system grounded in sound science, transparency, and consistency.”
Jed Bower, President, National Corn Growers Association: “This is great news for all farmers in the country. Today’s decision reaffirms that FIFRA is the law of the land and states cannot add undue and unproven requirements not backed by science.”
National Cotton Council of America: “The National Cotton Council appreciates the continued access to crop protection products.”
Georgia
Will Bentley, President, Georgia Agribusiness Council: “The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision reinforces the importance of a consistent, science-based regulatory process for crop protection products. Farmers depend on EPA-approved labels when making decisions that affect their crops, their operations, and their bottom line. Georgia recognized this principle last year when the General Assembly passed legislation affirming that EPA-approved labels are the standard for pesticide labeling in our state. The Court’s ruling provides additional certainty that farmers can continue to rely on a predictable regulatory system while maintaining access to the crop protection tools they need to produce safe, affordable food and fiber.”
Idaho
Idaho Grain Producers Association: “For growers, this matters: a patchwork of state-by-state labeling requirements would create legal uncertainty and threaten access to crop protection tools that have passed EPA’s rigorous review process. Science-based, nationally consistent pesticide regulation is a win for farmers and consumers alike.”
Samantha Parrott, Executive Director, Snake River Sugarbeet Growers Association: “Snake River Sugarbeet Growers Association applauds today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision affirming the authority of EPA’s science-based review process. This landmark ruling provides much-needed regulatory certainty for farmers and supports continued access to safe, effective crop protection tools that help grow an affordable and abundant food supply. For sugarbeet growers across Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, this decision reinforces the importance of sound science, consistent regulation, and policies that allow farmers to remain productive, sustainable, and competitive.”
Illinois
Illinois Soybean Association: “Today, Illinois Soybean Growers (ISG) issued a statement following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Durnell v. Monsanto. The Court ruled that federal pesticide labeling requirements under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempt state failure-to-warn claims that would require labeling different from EPA-approved labels. The decision specifically addresses whether state-law claims may require a cancer warning on glyphosate-based Roundup products when EPA-approved labels do not include one. Farmers rely on clear, consistent pesticide labels and predictable rules to make informed decisions,” said Illinois Soybean Board Chairman, Bryan Severs. “The Court’s ruling provides clarity on federal pesticide regulation and the role of EPA-approved labels. EPA has concluded that glyphosate, when used according to the label, does not pose a cancer risk. State-level requirements that differ from science-based EPA-approved labels can create confusion, weaken confidence in the regulatory process, and limit farmers’ access to important crop protection tools.”
Kentucky
Kentucky Farm Bureau: “For Kentucky farmers, access to proven crop protection technologies remains essential. Products such as glyphosate play a critical role in conservation tillage practices, weed management, and sustainable food production. Kentucky Farm Bureau has long supported regulatory decisions that are grounded in sound science. The Supreme Court’s decision helps preserve that certainty and ensures farmers can continue utilizing tools that have undergone extensive review by federal regulators.”
Minnesota
Minnesota AgriGrowth: “A strong 7-2 ruling today from the U.S. Supreme Court on who decides warning labels on pesticide containers. Following science should be the foundation for public policy. Science won today.”
Missouri
Joint Statement from Missouri Farm Bureau, Missouri Dairy, Missouri Cattlemen’s Association, Missouri Corn Growers Association, Missouri Soybean Association, and Missouri Pork Association: “Today’s Supreme Court ruling is a major victory for Missouri farmers and farm families who depend on clear, science-based rules to raise food, fuel, and fiber for our country. Farmers need certainty that crop protection tools approved through the federal regulatory process will remain available and governed by a consistent national standard, not a patchwork of conflicting state-by-state requirements. Glyphosate and other crop protection products are essential tools for farmers working to control weeds, protect yields, reduce soil disturbance, and keep farms productive. When litigation threatens to override federal science-based labeling decisions, it creates uncertainty that can drive critical tools out of the marketplace and make it harder for farmers to do their jobs. This decision affirms the importance of federal regulatory consistency and recognizes that pesticide labels should be guided by the law and the expert agencies charged with reviewing these products. Missouri’s agriculture organizations will continue standing up for farmers’ access to safe, effective, and legally approved tools they need to feed and fuel America.”
North Carolina
North Carolina Grange: “The North Carolina Grange welcomes the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision regarding Roundup litigation. We believe the ruling provides much-needed clarity and consistency for farmers who rely on science-based crop protection tools to produce a safe, affordable, and abundant food supply.”
Oregon
Oregonians for Food & Shelter: “This decision preserves producers’ access to vital tools, reinforcing the agriculture and natural resource industries and helping secure a reliable supply of the food and fiber we depend on in our daily lives.”
Tennessee
Eric Mayberry, President, Tennessee Farm Bureau: “The Tennessee Farm Bureau Federation applauds today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, reaffirming that Congress intended pesticide labeling to be governed by a single, uniform federal standard under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The Court held that state-law failure-to-warn claims cannot be used to impose labeling requirements that differ from those approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This decision provides much-needed certainty for American agriculture. Farmers make critical production decisions based on products that have undergone extensive scientific review through the EPA’s rigorous registration process. Allowing individual states, or juries, to effectively rewrite federally approved labels would create a confusing patchwork of requirements that undermines consistency, increases legal uncertainty, and threatens access to essential crop protection products. Tennessee Farm Bureau will continue advocating for science-based policies that support farmers and protect our nation’s food supply.”
Jay Yeargin, President, Tennessee Soybean Association: “All pesticides have undergone years of review by federal regulatory agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This decision provides necessary clarity for farmers and community members alike regarding the safety and efficacy of these products, allowing farmers to continue operating sustainably and profitably for generations to come.”
###
About the Modern Ag Alliance
The Modern Ag Alliance is a diverse coalition of more than 115 agricultural organizations advocating for U.S. farmers’ access to the crop protection tools they need to ensure we have a robust and affordable domestic food supply. To learn more, visit modernagalliance.org.