SCOTUS Reinforces FIFRA Preemption In Significant Products Liability Decision

On June 25, 2026, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Monsanto Company v. Durnell, 609 U.S. ___ (2026), holding in a 7–2 opinion that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (“FIFRA”) expressly preempts certain state-law failure-to-warn claims. Specifically, the Court held that a state-law claim is preempted where it would require a manufacturer to include labeling that is “in addition to or different from” labeling approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The case arises from EPA’s longstanding position that glyphosate—the active ingredient in Roundup—is not likely to cause cancer and therefore does not require a cancer warning on product labeling. Under FIFRA’s comprehensive regulatory scheme, pesticide labels must be submitted to and approved by EPA, and manufacturers are required to use those approved labels unless and until EPA approves a change. FIFRA also includes an express preemption provision, titled “Uniformity,” that prohibits