(Daily Signal)—Despite the backlash since Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling shielding Monsanto from liability, the Environmental Protection Agency is pushing ahead on glyphosate, telling the Daily Signal how it plans to navigate the Make America Healthy Again movement’s growing outrage.
In a 7-2 decision on Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, will be shielded from liability over Roundup, its widely used brand of weed and grass killer. In response, MAHA activists are firing back at the Trump administration and Zeldin’s leadership at the EPA.
The EPA told the Daily Signal it is conducting a scientific review of the pesticide.
“The EPA is committed to advancing science-based innovation and stewardship in pesticide use. Working closely with federal partners, the agency is promoting more sustainable practices, including steps to minimize reliance on preharvest desiccation applications of glyphosate,” a spokesperson at the EPA told the Daily Signal.
“This year, EPA is undertaking a comprehensive, transparent, and rigorous scientific review of glyphosate to evaluate its use and ensure decisions are fully aligned with the best available evidence and public health and environmental protections.”
The case at the center of the Supreme Court’s ruling was filed by Missouri resident John Durnell, who used Roundup and later developed cancer. Durnell initially won a large jury award in Missouri after arguing that Monsanto failed to put a cancer warning on the product label.
Monsanto fought the verdict, arguing that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) already required EPA approval of the label, so states could not force additional warnings.
“Because Durnell’s state tort claim would impose a pesticide labeling requirement ‘in addition to or different from’ the label required by EPA, FIFRA expressly preempts Durnell’s claim,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote.
The EPA’s stance, in which it states that the pesticide is safe for human health when used as directed on the label, is counter to MAHA’s outlook, and also to the views of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
According to the EPA’s website, the agency has found “no risks of concern to human health when glyphosate is used in accordance with its current label.” It also states that glyphosate is “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”
Outside the agency, many members of the farming and agriculture industry have likewise strongly defended the pesticide. Some growers say glyphosate products not only control weeds effectively but also contribute to healthier soil by enabling spraying instead of tilling.
“Glyphosate remains one of the most replied upon and widely used tools for American farmers, sustaining the productivity, affordability, and resilience of U.S. agriculture,” the EPA spokesperson told the Daily Signal.
“Growers rely on crop protection options to remain competitive and ensure a stable domestic food supply, safeguarding it against the insects, diseases, and weeds that would otherwise reduce yields, raise costs, and threaten the availability of affordable food.”
Despite that support, MAHA has criticized the EPA’s reliance on studies for pesticides like glyphosate, focusing on alleged industry influence and potential conflicts of interest. Critics argue that many of the toxicity and safety studies the agency uses are paid for and submitted by the chemical companies themselves.
When asked what the agency’s upcoming glyphosate review would look like, the EPA outlined several steps.
The agency will increase transparency by expanding public access to underlying data and scientific rationale used in glyphosate assessments; evaluate independent, peer-reviewed research in assessing potential cancer and developmental risks; and look for opportunities to reduce unnecessary exposure, especially in residential settings and around schools.
Further, the EPA plans to work with states, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Health and Human Services to promote integrated pest management and alternative weed control strategies that lower chemical reliance where feasible.
It also will work with both departments to develop a research-and-evaluation framework for cumulative exposure across chemical classes in the food supply, as well as strengthen monitoring of residues in food and water, in coordination with federal partners.
“EPA’s goal is clear: protect children, support farmers, and ensure that decisions are driven by science, not politics or special interests,” the agency noted.
The EPA’s deadline for the completion of glyphosate’s registration review is set for Oct. 1, 2026.
