Supreme Court Considers Bayer's Right to Poison Without Liability
Bayer, owner of Monsanto and its controversial glyphosate-based Roundup, is asking the Supreme Court to shield it from lawsuits claiming the weedkiller causes non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This isn’t just a quest for legal clarity; it’s a standard corporate maneuver to externalize costs, much like when tobacco companies fought for decades to obscure cancer links or Purdue Pharma engineered the opioid
crisis. The staggering part? Bayer has already faced judgments totaling billions and settled tens of thousands of other lawsuits for substantial sums, indicating a tacit admission of significant issues. This appeal isn’t about justice; it’s about establishing a precedent that protects corporate bottom lines above public health and environmental safety. One might wonder when public health becomes
less a matter of corporate responsibility and more a perpetual legal defense fund for the financially endowed. When will the Supreme Court rule in favor of the victims, rather than consistently entertaining arguments designed to protect corporate power, often after vast profits have already been reaped from harmful products? It appears the right to pollute and endanger still finds a sympathetic
ear in high places.