(The Daily Caller)—The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the maker of Roundup on Thursday, sparking outrage among supporters of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement.
In a 7-2 decision authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Monsanto’s parent company Bayer, stating that U.S. states cannot require pesticide label warnings beyond those mandated by federal regulation. In handing down its decision, the Court halted thousands of lawsuits alleging that the Big Pharma company failed to warn consumers about the weedkiller’s potential cancer risks.
“This ruling is a giant gift to a foreign chemical company, and an insult to American farmers and workers whose cancers arose from the use of the herbicide Roundup,” U.S. Right to Know President Gary Ruskin said in a statement provided to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “In essence, it puts the chemical industry above the law, and will have far-ranging effects that make Americans more likely to get sick from toxic exposures.”
Jason Davidson, senior food and agriculture campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said in a Thursday statement that the ruling was “profoundly” disappointing.
“We’re profoundly disappointed that the Supreme Court has restricted farmers’ and consumers’ ability to hold pesticide manufacturers accountable for the harm their toxic products have caused,” Davidson said. “Now, Congress has a moral responsibility to put people’s health over pesticide industry profits by codifying a legal pathway for those hurt by toxic pesticide exposure.”
Moreover, Moms Across America Founding Executive Director Zen Honeycutt said in a statement that Thursday’s ruling “sets a dangerous precedent by elevating regulatory approval above judicial review and citizen access to justice.”
“The separation of powers exists to provide independent oversight and protect against regulatory capture,” Honeycutt added. “No agency should have the final word on corporate accountability when products designed to kill are released into the environment and used throughout our food system.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling on Thursday comes after President Donald Trump unveiled an executive order in February aiming to boost the domestic production of glyphosate, drawing fierce criticism from some MAHA movement supporters. Glyphosate is a commonly used herbicide that has been registered as a pesticide in the U.S. since 1974, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
When asked for comment, Bayer referred the DCNF to its Thursday press release.
“This decision, which reflects strong support across the ideological spectrum of the Court, helps to bring significant containment to the Roundup™ litigation,” the release reads in part. “Glyphosate remains the most studied crop protection tool in the world and this decision affirms that the EPA’s safety determination is the law of the land, ensuring that companies cannot be punished under a patchwork of state tort laws for complying with federal labeling requirements.”
Vani Hari, a MAHA movement leader also known as “The Food Babe,” stated in an X post that the decision is “a devastating blow to every family that trusted our justice system.”
Moreover, MAHA Action wrote in a statement posted to X that the Supreme Court’s decision “effectively shuts down the primary legal path many plaintiffs have used to hold Monsanto accountable.”
“SCOTUS rules Monsanto/Bayer can’t be sued for omitting a warning even if their herbicides do cause cancer,” Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie wrote on X in response to the decision. “Even if the legal reasoning of the court is sound in this case, it’s a blatant travesty of justice.”
“Congress and the President can fix this and we absolutely should,” Massie continued.
Alex Clark, a MAHA podcaster who works for Turning Point USA, claimed in a statement posted to X that the Supreme Court has now “made it impossible for people who develop cancer after using Roundup to sue Bayer for failing to warn them about the potential cancer risk.”
“The Trump administration URGED and PLEADED the Court to reach this result to protect a FOREIGN chemical company—and it did at the expense of Americans,” Clark wrote in the social media post. “What happened to America First? For an administration that promised to take on corporate capture and Make America Healthy Again, this is a STUNNING betrayal. Farmers, families, and cancer patients currently in litigation with Bayer will never forget this.”
“First Donald Trump signed an executive order plowing the field for increased glyphosate production despite the known health risks to help grow profits for his chemical industry donors,” Protect Our Care’s Public Health Project Director Kayla Hancock said in a Thursday statement. “Then Trump dispatched his DOJ lawyers to help Big Chemical secure blanket immunity from at least 100,000 glyphosate-related liability claims. Sadly, the Supreme Court agreed to give glyphosate makers a free pass to poison Americans without warning.”
Meanwhile, Bayer said in a statement that the Supreme Court’s decision is “good for science, farmers, and industries that depend on regulatory clarity for innovation.”
“It should help significantly contain the Roundup litigation after nearly a decade of legal battles,” according to Bayer’s statement. “The ruling should result in the dismissal of current warning-based claims and bar future failure-to-warn claims. Monsanto will continue to pursue final approval of the class settlement and other elements of its multi-pronged strategy to contain the Roundup litigation.”
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.