Court Says EPA Shirked Duties on Glyphosate

A historic win today!

From the Center for Food Safety:

SAN FRANCISCO — Today, in a historic victory for farm workers and the environment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit sided with the Center for Food Safety (CFS) and its represented farmworker and conservation clients by overturning the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) decision that the toxic pesticide glyphosate is safe for humans and imperiled wildlife. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto-Bayer's flagship Roundup weed killer, the most widely used pesticide in the world.

The 54-page opinion held the Trump administration's 2020 interim registration of glyphosate to be unlawful because "EPA did not adequately consider whether glyphosate causes cancer and shirked its duties under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)." Represented by the Center for Food Safety, the petitioners in the lawsuit included the Rural Coalition, Farmworker Association of Florida, Organización en California de Lideres Campesinas, and Beyond Pesticides. A consolidated case is led by Natural Resources Defense Council and includes Pesticide Action Network.

Read the full article here

Moms Across America applauds the CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY and allies:

Petitioners: NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL and the PESTICIDE ACTION NETWORK NORTH AMERICA,

RURAL COALITION, ORGANIZACION EN CALIFORNIA DE LÍDERES CAMPESINAS, FARMWORKER ASSOCIATION OF FLORIDA, BEYOND PESTICIDES, and the CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY

...for taking this action to hold the EPA and others to account! Hallelujah!

Opposing intervenors included in the lawsuit were:

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WHEAT GROWERS; NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION; NATIONAL COTTON COUNCIL; AMERICAN SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION; AMERICAN SUGARBEET GROWERS ASSOCIATION; NATIONAL SORGHUM PRODUCERS; AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION; AGRICULTURAL RETAILERS ASSOCIATION; NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LANDSCAPE PROFESSIONALS; GOLF COURSE SUPERINTENDENTS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; MONSANTO COMPANY,

We also applaud the sensible decision by:

J. Clifford Wallace, Danny J. Boggs,* and Michelle T. Friedland, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge Friedland

*The Honorable Danny J. Boggs, United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.

"Today's decision gives voice to those who suffer from glyphosate's cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma," said Amy van Saun, senior attorney with the Center for Food Safety and lead counsel in the case. "EPA's 'no cancer' risk conclusion did not stand up to scrutiny. Today is a major victory for farmworkers and others exposed to glyphosate. Imperiled wildlife also won today, as the court agreed that EPA needed to ensure the safety of endangered species before greenlighting glyphosate."

As to its cancer conclusion, the court concluded that EPA flouted its own Cancer Guidelines and ignored the criticisms of its own experts. EPA's "not likely to cause cancer" conclusion was inconsistent with the evidence before it, in the form of both epidemiological studies (real-world cancer cases) and lab animal studies. In addition to its lack of conclusion as to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma risk (cancer most tied to glyphosate), the court also concluded that EPA's general "no cancer" decision was divorced from its own Guidelines and experts when EPA selectively discounted evidence that glyphosate causes tumors in animals. At various points, the Court criticized EPA's "disregard of tumor results;" its use of "bare assertions" that "fail[] to account coherently for the evidence;" making conclusions that do not "withstand[] scrutiny under the agency's own framework," and "fail[ing] to abide by" its cancer guidelines. In sum, the court noted EPA's "inconsistent reasoning" made its decision on cancer "arbitrary" and struck it down.

The court went on to conclude that EPA's decision also violated the Endangered Species Act. As the court noted, EPA itself elsewhere had admitted that "glyphosate 'may affect' all listed species experiencing glyphosate exposure—that is 1,795 endangered or threatened species" yet had unlawfully ignored the ESA for this decision.

FINALLY! The EPA is facing its bald-faced LIES!

Corruption is being called to the mat, and it only has four months left to try its moves. The panel concluded that EPA’s determination that glyphosate was not likely to be carcinogenic was not supported by substantial evidence.

As to remedy, the court struck down or vacated the human health assessment. The court also required that EPA redo and/or finish all remaining glyphosate determinations by an October 2022 deadline, or within four months. This includes a redone ecological toxicity assessment, a redone costs analysis of impacts to farmers from pesticide harms, as well as all Endangered Species analysis and mitigation.

The EPA may not issue a registration for a pesticide that causes “unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.” In 2007, Congress added a new process called “registration review” to the FIFRA scheme governing pesticides, instructing EPA to periodically review pesticide registrations every fifteen years. For pesticides registered before 2007, such as glyphosate, EPA must complete the first registration review by October 1, 2022.

EPA began its registration review of glyphosate in 2009 and completed a preliminary ecological risk assessment of the pesticide in 2015.

The EPA has been "reviewing" glyphosate studies for 13 YEARS! Do we think that enough is enough! YES!

We are thrilled with the court's decisions and thank everyone for supporting us for 10 years while we raised awareness about this important issue.

We again thank the Center for Food Safety and everyone who has worked hard on this issue.

During these last four months, we ask you to support Moms Across America to get some CRUCIAL testing done to expose the harms of glyphosate and other chemicals.