If you have been following the national agricultural news lately beyond discussions on policy, there has been a focus on state legislatures considering crop protection legislation. You might be asking yourself, “What is this legislation focused on protecting? And does it benefit me as a hay and forage producer?”
The laws protect companies that produce federally approved pesticides from being sued later for concerns over the use of those pesticides according to the label.
We have 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 Sygenta, the manufacturer of Paraquat, for claims that the product causes Parkinson’s disease. Included in that lawsuit are Chevron – the former manufacturer of Paraquat – and FMC Corporation, a distributor of Paraquat. Trials in that class action are expected to begin later this year.
Finally, the American Vanguard Corporation (AMVAC) Chemical Corporation has been sued due to claims that Dacthal (DCPA) has caused birth defects. In late 2024, the EPA issued an emergency order to stop the use of DCPA due to potential health risk claims. This is just a small list of litigation that may grow over time, limiting the ability to utilize pesticides on an operation.
The debate on crop protection legislation concerns this type of litigation. If passed by a state legislature and signed into law by the governor, the legislation would limit liability for users and manufacturers of federally approved pesticides. Under the legislation being proposed in several states, a federally approved pesticide label would be considered sufficient as long as it includes the most recent human health assessment required under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) or a label consistent with the EPA carcinogenicity classification for the pesticide required under FIFRA.
Under the legislation, this warning label would be considered 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).
Currently, federal law under FIFRA requires the EPA to review product labels for all pesticides sold in the U.S. These labels usually contain information on handling, storing and using pesticides safely. At the same time, it includes the ingredients, safety equipment needed, environmental concerns, health concerns and other information related to the pesticide. States can have labeling requirements for safe use in their own states, but state labeling requirements cannot be more stringent than federal regulations. The proposed crop protection legislation would find this federally approved label sufficient to warn and limit potential lawsuits.
This legislation has been signed into law in North Dakota, and as of the writing of this article, it has passed in the Georgia Legislature and has not been signed by the governor. Currently, the legislation is before the legislatures in Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Oklahoma and Tennessee.
