Supreme Court Gives Pesticide Corporations Immunity from Cancer Lawsuits
mikhael
29 points
15 comments
June 25, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 126.0ms across 11,625 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- US Supreme Court scales back Roundup cancer lawsuits Tomte · 12 pts · June 25, 2026 · 64% similar
- Supreme Court to hear arguments in landmark Roundup weedkiller case mikhael · 139 pts · April 27, 2026 · 58% similar
- In Illinois, cancer and pesticide rates typically rise together toomuchtodo · 16 pts · June 02, 2026 · 50% similar
- Key landmark regulations against 'forever' toxins removed by Trump admin zzzeek · 15 pts · May 18, 2026 · 48% similar
- Iowa cancer rates surge – farm chemicals are a key risk, new report finds PaulHoule · 30 pts · April 15, 2026 · 47% similar
Discussion Highlights (5 comments)
cyanydeez
...Health Insurance industry celebrates long term reliance goals.
ggoo
Absolute disgrace.
gruez
Title is misleading. The case is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Co._v._Durnell , and Wikipedia's summary is: >The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Actpreempts a state-law labeling requirement that differs from the federal labeling requirements imposed under FIFRA. In other words, they don't have immunity from cancer lawsuits. They have immunity from cancer lawsuits stemming from being noncompliant with state labeling laws.
Legend2440
Editorialized title. Actual ruling seems reasonable from a legal perspective. It is the EPA's job to determine if a chemical is safe. If they say it is, why is it the court's job to say otherwise?
_--__--__
The people who put shit like this out, referring to the Supreme Court as the "Trump administration" siding with Bayer in favor of cancer and poison, think you are too stupid to find that "Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Kavanaugh, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Thomas, J., filed a concurring opinion. Jackson, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Gorsuch, J., joined." Most Americans do not understand the constitutional role of the judicial branch, and rhetoric like this exploits that in ways that are really bad for the integrity of our government and political discourse. Supreme Court opinions are public and generally comprehensible by an average citizen. Please take even the tiniest amount of effort to understand how our government process works before buying into flamebait from media orgs and NGOs that profit from your ignorance. And if you have a problem with our laws, it's usually best to blame the lawmakers first.