We can stop liability shields for pesticide companies

Young plants have emerged from the soil and we are now entering the season where our efforts move from planting to tending the fields. We are noticing the potential for fine apple, white peach, and pear harvests, which shows clear evidence that our pollinators have been successful in their work. Meanwhile, I am experiencing a sense of relief now that many state legislative sessions have completed business for 2025.  The last few months have taken their toll and I want to spend a bit more time working on the farm.

One of my tasks in recent months has been to represent PAN in coalitions working to halt proposed legislation that would provide pesticide companies with a liability shield. These bills would prevent individuals, like you and me, from seeking accountability if we are harmed by pesticides and it can be shown that the pesticide company misrepresented the risks their products might have for our health.

The Modern Ag Alliance, spearheaded by Bayer, has been pouring money into states in an effort to gain immunity to lawsuits. Their motivation comes from mounting settlements as a result of court findings that Monsanto (owned by Bayer) failed to properly divulge the risk for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma to users of their RoundUp products. Rather than proactively working to reduce risks and seek to care for those who might have been harmed, Bayer and Big Ag are seeking a license to deceive and, potentially, harm us.

The good news is that the efforts of concerned organizations and people like you have blocked this legislation in eight states, including my home state of Iowa. While the Modern Ag Alliance poured money into advertising and a wave of lobbyists, grassroots efforts took away what they thought were going to be easy wins.

I would like to thank everyone who signed onto our actions, attended events our coalition members promoted, and went the extra mile to contact legislators and governors regarding these bills. While this battle is not yet over for the year (there is still activity in North Carolina, Ohio and at the federal level), we are showing strength and unity of purpose that brings results.

Thank you for taking the time to read and consider my words.  Please continue reading for more details regarding Failure to Warn / Lawsuit Immunity / Liability Shield bills in 2025.

Status summary for 2025 lawsuit immunity bills

The following is a summary outlining the status of the 2025 Lawsuit Immunity bills brought forward in state legislatures.

• Signed into law: North Dakota and Georgia
• Introduced and reassigned to committee in the Senate: North Carolina
• Lobbyists looking to introduce language into budget bill: Ohio
• Introduced but failed to be assigned to committee: Idaho, Montana
• Assigned to committee, but failed to advance: Mississippi, Wyoming
• Removed by bill’s sponsors: Florida
• Deferred in committee until the 2026 session: Tennessee
• Failed to pass both arms of legislature: Missouri and Iowa

Lawsuit immunity becomes law in two states

Bills that grant lawsuit immunity to pesticide companies passed in two states and are scheduled to become law in 2026. The bill was introduced in North Dakota and Georgia as a “common sense” bill and saw little opposition early in the process. This was the model the Modern Ag Alliance was hoping to see unfold in other states. If the bill was pushed through before it could be thoroughly analyzed, it would be too late for opposition to form.

While the bill was signed into law in both states, grassroots movements did make the process uncomfortable for those who supported the bill. Governor Kemp of Georgia opted to very quietly sign the bill, hoping to avoid more negative publicity.

Meanwhile, a grassroots movement in North Dakota is seeking to put this before the voters as a referendum. If the voting population stands against this bill, it would be repealed. Our coalition partners at Dakota Resource Council are attempting to gather resources and lead a petition process to get this referendum onto next year’s ballot.

Idaho fights back

Idaho is home to mines that supply phosphates to a large glyphosate facility owned by Bayer/Monsanto. Bayer has used the threat of economic losses in an effort to pressure the state to provide pesticide companies shelter from potential lawsuits.

Along with Iowa and Missouri, Idaho was targeted in 2024 with these bills. The Modern Ag Alliance likely assumed that these states would be easy wins, especially given their economic connections to glyphosate manufacturing and agricultural reliance on related pesticide products.

Fortunately, Idaho has had recent experience with other sectors seeking liability shields and this bill was recognized for what it was. Last year’s opposition worked hard to make sure legislators understood the bill’s ultimate purpose. As a result, many politicians did not want to be connected with any bill containing lawsuit immunity language in 2025.

“Ultimately it’s a question of, ‘If this is such a certifiably safe product, then why in the world would you need immunity from any liability?’”

– Jonathan Oppenheimer, Idaho Conservation League

This year, the pesticide immunity bill was defeated despite Bayer’s spending (about $600,000) in an effort to promote a bill.  The bill was not given a hearing in a committee in 2025.

Iowa and Missouri battle to the end

In Iowa and Missouri, attempts were made to get pesticide company liability shields passed up until the last moments of their legislative sessions. The presence of lobbyists employed by the Modern Ag Alliance was strong, but the work of coalitions in both states headed off attempts to sneak the language into other bills.

The bill passed the Missouri House, but ran into opposition in the Senate.  However, the Senate Agriculture, Food Production and Outdoor Resources Committee attempted to circumvent opponents by appending language from HB 544 on to HB 1116, a bill that would “allow real property owners building a fence to enter an adjoining property up to ten feet without liability for trespassing.” It was passed out of that committee with no opportunity for public comment.

Fortunately, eagle-eyed coalition members recognized the situation and were able to be in attendance. As a result, this deceptive attempt to pass the bill was exposed and halted.

In Iowa, the bill passed the Senate, getting the minimum number of votes required (26).  Intense public pressure that found its voice initially in 2024 reinforced the desire of many House Representatives to “have nothing to do with this bill.” As was the case in 2024, there were conversations to attempt to append lawsuit immunity language to the Appropriations Bill, but opposition remained firm.

“Our farm families are exposed to any number of risks that are inherent in the job of raising food for our communities, our state, and our country. We proudly dedicate our lives and our livelihood to the task and take responsibility for our actions. We’re deeply disappointed that Iowa Senators chose to protect chemical companies from their responsibility to provide the safest products they can and chose to take away an important tool farmers and all Iowans have to hold those companies accountable.”

– Aaron Lehman, Alleman farmer and president of the Iowa Farmers Union.

States currently being monitored

North Carolina currently has a bill in the Senate (SB 639) that has been through multiple committees and was scheduled to go to the floor. But, it was removed from the calendar two weeks ago and sent back to the Committee on Rules and Operations of the Senate. The lawsuit immunity language can be found in Section 19 of that bill. Our coalition partners at Toxic Free NC have been leading local opposition with great success. For more information, check out this article in NC Health News.

There has been some pressure from Modern Ag Alliance lobbyists in Ohio to include liability shield language for pesticide companies in the state budget bill (HB 96). The bill was introduced only a couple of days ago and does not include lawsuit immunity language at this time. Our coalition partners at Beyond Pesticides are monitoring the situation for developments.

PAN is prepared to help members take action in both states once the coalition’s leading organization in each state indicates a need to do so. Stay tuned, we may be asking for your help to persuade legislators to listen to the people instead of Bayer’s professional lobbyists.