Letters to the Editor

The views expressed are those of the individual authors and not necessarily those of DTN, its management or employees.

**

To the Editor:

Times are challenging in farm country. The hardworking men and women who grow safe, affordable food for our nation are struggling in ways we have not seen in decades. Uncertainty caused by markets, trade, weather, and other difficulties are putting many family farms at risk. While the government cannot address all these challenges, there are some easy, common-sense ways it can help, like providing regulatory certainty to farmers. Last month, our organizations were among a dozen farm groups, representing hundreds of thousands of American producers, who penned a brief calling on the Supreme Court to help do just that.

Farmers need safe, well-regulated pesticides to protect crops from weeds, insect pests, fungi, and diseases that can devastate crops. Many of these tools can also help farmers adopt more sustainable soil health practices. For example, instead of intensively plowing the soil, farmers can manage destructive weeds using safe, effective herbicides, which can also conserve water, reduce erosion, sequester greenhouse gases, and bring many other environmental benefits. Without continued access to these tools, it would be very difficult to continue providing the affordable, abundant supplies of food and other agricultural goods needed by U.S. consumers. Our nation would likely become increasingly reliant on imports for our food, placing our national security at risk.

While farmers have depended on a predictable pesticide regulatory system for decades, this has recently changed. Several courts have misinterpreted long-standing provisions in federal pesticide law that allow only the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to establish a national, uniform label for each pesticide they approve. Without a standard national label, we could see the emergence of an unworkable patchwork of labels, all with potentially contradictory claims or requirements. Not only would this create confusion for farmers and the public seeking to use these products, but it would be impossible for manufacturers to continue to commercially support these products under such an onerous labeling system. Tools could be pulled from the market that farmers need to protect crops and safely feed the American public.

At the heart of this issue is the popular herbicide, glyphosate, which EPA and numerous other global regulators--including Europe, Canada, Japan, Australia, Korea, and others--have repeatedly found is not a carcinogen. Yet, courts have found manufacturers have failed to label glyphosate as a potential carcinogen, despite EPA and a robust global regulatory consensus finding otherwise. This has not only sowed confusion in the regulatory landscape, but it has placed manufacturers in a no-win situation. To respond to erroneous court rulings, they would have to falsely label a product at odds with EPA findings, which is in violation of federal pesticide law. It is only a matter of time before farmers lose access to essential products amidst this uncertainty.

However, the Supreme Court can help. By hearing this matter and restoring regulatory certainty, the Court can reaffirm EPA's gold-standard science and uphold federal law. They can also help U.S. farmers maintain access to tools they need to continue providing the American people with the safest, most abundant, and affordable food supply in the world.

Stephen Censky, CEO, American Soybean Association; Luther Markwart, Executive Vice President and CEO, American Sugarbeet Growers Association; Cathy Burns, CEO, International Fresh Produce Association; and Chandler Goule, CEO, National Association of Wheat Growers

**

Letters may be emailed to edit@dtn.com or mailed to Greg Horstmeier, DTN, 18205 Capitol Avenue, Omaha, NE 68022.

(c) Copyright 2025 DTN, LLC. All rights reserved.