Post Durnell Argument Statements – Attributable to Monsanto

We appreciate the Court's careful consideration of FIFRA's Uniformity language and how its federal preemption provision applies to state-based label warnings.

We believe the U.S. Government and the Company made persuasive arguments that state-based warning claims 'in addition to or different from' warning labels approved by EPA under FIFRA, as in Durnell, are preempted, and this is necessary to avoid a patchwork of 50 different warning labels. Companies should not be punished under state law for complying with federal label requirements. The security and affordability of the nation's food supply depend on farmers' and manufacturers' ability to rely on the science-based judgments of federal regulators. A favorable ruling by the Supreme Court would provide essential regulatory clarity for companies who seek to bring currently approved and new products to market, addressing their ability to serve U.S. farmers and consumers.