The United States Supreme Court has decided that federal law stops state-level lawsuits against the manufacturer of Roundup for not including cancer warnings on its product labels.

美國最高法院已裁定，聯邦法律將阻止州級政府因 Roundup 產品標籤未包含癌症警告而對製造商提起訴訟。

The court case, Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, focused on the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). In a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled that because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decided that glyphosate is unlikely to cause cancer and did not require a warning label, state-law claims cannot be pursued. Justice Brett Kavanaugh emphasized that state lawsuits cannot force companies to use labels that are different from those set by the EPA. Consequently, this ruling overturned a previous Missouri jury decision that had awarded $1.25 million to John Durnell, who claimed he developed cancer after using the herbicide.

這起 Monsanto Co. v. Durnell 案件聚焦於《聯邦殺蟲劑、殺菌劑及殺鼠劑法案》（FIFRA）。法院以 7 比 2 的裁決結果認定，由於環境保護署（EPA）認定 glyphosate 不太可能導致癌症且未要求標記警告標籤，因此無法追究州法之主張。大法官 Brett Kavanaugh 強調，州政府的訴訟不能強迫公司使用與 EPA 設定不同的標籤。因此，此裁決推翻了先前密蘇里州陪審團的決定，該決定原判給 John Durnell 125 萬美元賠償，他聲稱在使用該除草劑後患上癌症。

There are strong disagreements between different groups regarding this decision. The Trump administration supported the company, arguing that the EPA is the only authority that should decide on health warnings. However, Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Neil Gorsuch disagreed. Justice Jackson asserted that the majority misunderstood the law and denied justice to injured people. Furthermore, this outcome has caused a political split between the administration and the 'Make America Healthy Again' (MAHA) movement, which wants stricter pesticide rules and views this support as a failure to protect public health.

不同群體對此決定存在嚴重分歧。川普政府支持該公司，認為 EPA 是唯一應決定健康警告的權威機構。然而，大法官 Ketanji Brown Jackson 和 Neil Gorsuch 並不認同。Jackson 大法官主張，多數派誤解了法律，並否認了受傷者的正義。此外，這一結果導致政府與「讓美國再次健康」（MAHA）運動之間出現政治分歧，後者要求更嚴格的農藥規範，並將此次支持視為未能保護公共健康。

From a business perspective, the ruling provides much-needed clarity for Bayer, the company that bought Monsanto in 2018. Bayer has faced about 200,000 claims and has set aside $16 billion for settlements. While this decision will likely lead to the dismissal of thousands of lawsuits regarding labels, it does not stop lawsuits based on the actual design of the product. This ruling may also affect other chemicals, such as Syngenta's paraquat, which is currently facing similar legal challenges.

從商業角度來看，這項裁決為 2018 年收購 Monsanto 的 Bayer 公司提供了急需的明確性。Bayer 面臨約 20 萬項索賠，並撥備了 160 億美元用於和解。雖然此決定可能會導致數千件關於標籤的訴訟被駁回，但它並未阻止基於產品實際設計的訴訟。這項裁決也可能影響其他化學品，例如 Syngenta 的百草強（paraquat），該產品目前也面臨類似的法律挑戰。

The ruling protects Bayer from most state-level lawsuits about warning labels, although the company is still working on a multi-billion dollar settlement for other remaining claims.

這項裁決保護了 Bayer 免於大多數關於警告標籤的州級訴訟，儘管該公司仍在處理其他剩餘索賠的數十億美元和解方案。