Roundup Settlement Program Remains Option With Supreme Court Review Pending: MDL Judge

Court indicates that plaintiffs who declined offers to settle their Roundup lawsuit may wish to reconsider, as the Supreme Court weighs whether the claims over failure to warn about non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma are preempted.

After the U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to consider whether Bayer and Monsanto should be immune from liability in Roundup non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma lawsuits, the federal judge overseeing pretrial proceedings is reminding parties of their duty to participate in a mediation program, indicating that plaintiffs who previously declined settlement offers may wish to reconsider.

The manufacturers of Roundup have faced more than 120,000 product liability lawsuits in recent years, each raising similar allegations that consumers were not adequately warned that exposure to glyphosate in the popular weed killer may cause non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other cancers.

To manage the growing litigation, federal courts consolidated the cases several years ago into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of California, where U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria has been presiding over coordinated discovery and preparing waves of cases for trial in various different federal courts.

Following a series of massive verdicts early in the litigation, the manufacturers agreed to pay more than $10 billion to resolve a large portion of Roundup claims. However, thousands of plaintiffs rejected Roundup settlement offers, and new claims continue to be filed as former users are diagnosed with cancer years after exposure.

Facing the prospect of paying billions more in future settlements or verdicts, Bayer has increasingly focused its defense on federal preemption arguments, contending that it cannot be held liable for failure-to-warn claims because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency would not have approved stronger cancer warnings on Roundup’s label.

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it was granting a writ of certiorari to Monsanto and its parent company, Bayer, who have asked the court to consider an appeal filed in April 2025, stemming from an October 2023 verdict that awarded $1.25 million in damages to a consumer.

The petition marks the manufacturers’ third attempt to obtain federal preemption protection from repeated jury verdicts in which jurors have found Bayer and Monsanto liable for recklessly endangering consumers by failing to warn about Roundup’s alleged cancer risks.

In a pretrial order (PDF) issued on January 28, days after the high court’s announcement that it would consider this latest appeal, Judge Chhabria reminded the parties that they are all required to participate in a settlement program being conducted by Special Master Kenneth Feinberg, as per a court order issued in 2021.

The judge also suggested that plaintiffs who previously participated in the Roundup settlement program, but decided not to take the offer, may wish to reconsider before any final ruling is issued by the Supreme Court on this latest appeal.

“[I]n light of the Supreme Court’s decision to take up the issue of whether state law failure to warn claims are preempted by federal law, plaintiffs who previously declined settlement offers received through Special Master Feinberg’s program may wish to reconsider. To be clear, no plaintiff who previously participated in the settlement program is required to do so again, but the program remains open to them if they are now interested.”

– U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria

The Supreme Court is expected to render a decision before the end of this judicial season in June 2026.

Some reports indicate that if the efforts to seek immunity fail under federal preemption fail, Bayer is considering seeking liability protection for Monsanto through the U.S. bankruptcy process, even though the company has billions of funds on hand to deal with the litigation.

To cut off the potential for future claims, Bayer also announced that it would reformulate Roundup in 2021, with plans to remove the active ingredient glyphosate from consumer versions of the weed killer. However, without additional settlements, the company is likely to continue facing new lawsuits for years, as former users develop non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma following use of the old Roundup formulations.