Bayer Statement on Oral Arguments in Carson
Bayer today issued the following statement on today’s oral arguments in front of the full Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Carson:
“The company believes the full Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals should affirm the district court’s ruling that state-based failure-to-warn claims different from or in addition to EPA’s science-based label, like those in this case, are expressly preempted by federal law under FIFRA. A state-required cancer warning would deviate from Roundup™’s EPA-approved labeling, render the product misbranded, and require the company to make a label change that would be contrary to the consistent conclusions of EPA’s scientific assessments for more than four decades.
“Further, the plaintiff’s attempt to enforce a state-based claim suffers from impossibility preemption since it would not be possible for the company to comply simultaneously with both state and federal requirements when a conflict between the two exists. Since EPA has exercised its statutory authority to determine that a cancer warning would be false and misleading in violation of FIFRA, a state cannot demand that a company violate federal law by including one.
“Bayer continues to stand fully behind its Roundup™ products, as the weight of scientific evidence and the conclusions of expert regulators worldwide continue to support the safety of glyphosate-based herbicides and that they are not carcinogenic.”