The Make America Healthy Again movement helped put Donald Trump back in the White House. Now the people who marched, rallied, and voted for that agenda are furious.
And the Supreme Court just handed them a reason to stay that way.
SCOTUS sided with Bayer and its Monsanto subsidiary in a ruling that slammed the courthouse door on thousands of Americans who say Roundup gave them cancer — and the Trump administration helped make it happen.
What the Court Actually Did
In a 7-2 decision authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Monsanto’s parent company Bayer, stating that U.S. states cannot require pesticide label warnings beyond those mandated by federal regulation.
The case stemmed from the claim of cancer patient John Durnell, who sued Monsanto saying the company did not give an adequate warning of cancer risk related to its Roundup weedkiller. Under Missouri state law, he was awarded $1.25 million. Monsanto challenged the verdict, arguing that Durnell’s failure-to-warn claim was barred by the nation’s pesticide law, noting that the label Roundup is required to bear by the EPA does not include a cancer warning. The case centered on whether plaintiffs like Durnell can sue pesticide companies such as Monsanto in state court if they do not warn of health effects that go beyond those formally recognized by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Justice Kavanaugh wrote for the majority, arguing that because the EPA deems glyphosate safe when used properly and has not required a cancer warning label, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act preempts state-level failure-to-warn claims.
Joining Kavanaugh in the majority were liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, dissented. That lineup alone tells you this wasn’t a clean left-right split — which makes the political fallout for the White House harder to manage, not easier.
In her dissent, Jackson wrote: “In accepting Monsanto’s argument and holding that Durnell’s failure-to-warn claim is preempted, the Court misunderstands FIFRA’s requirements, misinterprets the scope of FIFRA’s preemption, and ultimately leaves Durnell without a remedy for the significant harms he has suffered.”
The Reaction Was Not Quiet
Vani Hari, the MAHA movement leader known as “The Food Babe,” didn’t mince words. She stated in an X post that the decision is “a devastating blow to every family that trusted our justice system.”
MAHA Action wrote in a statement posted to X that the Supreme Court’s decision “effectively shuts down the primary legal path many plaintiffs have used to hold Monsanto accountable.”
U.S. Right to Know President Gary Ruskin said in a statement: “This ruling is a giant gift to a foreign chemical company, and an insult to American farmers and workers whose cancers arose from the use of the herbicide Roundup.”
And then there was Alex Clark, a MAHA podcaster with Turning Point USA, who went straight at the White House. “The Trump administration URGED and PLEADED the Court to reach this result to protect a FOREIGN chemical company — and it did at the expense of Americans,” Clark wrote in her post on X. “What happened to America First?”
That question is going to echo. Bayer is a German company. Bayer, the company that owns Monsanto, is German. The America First movement spent years arguing that Washington puts multinational corporate interests ahead of ordinary Americans. MAHA supporters are now making that exact argument — about this administration.
MAHA advocate Kelly Ryerson, who goes by the online moniker “Glyphosate Girl,” wrote on X: “Never in history has an administration so blatantly and willingly sold out our fertility, vitality, and health to corporate interests. It is unforgivable. We will make sure all voters know exactly how this domestic chemical attack happened.”
The Bigger Picture for the Midterms
The Supreme Court’s ruling shielding the maker of Roundup weed killer from cancer lawsuits is the latest in a string of decisions that the Make America Healthy Again coalition says could cost Republicans at the ballot box in November.
A KFF poll released in May found that 41% of American adults say they support the MAHA movement. Those respondents skew Republican, but their concerns about food and vaccine safety and corporate influence are resonating well beyond the base. That’s not a fringe constituency. That’s a meaningful slice of the electorate that turned out for Trump in 2024 and is now openly questioning whether the administration is keeping faith with them.
Hannah Dunning, an independent voter and MAHA follower known as the “Clean Clothing Chick,” put it plainly: “In 2026 our children have more of a chance of getting sick than they do of being healthy, and we are pissed all the way off.” She wasn’t done. “If they want to be disrespectful to the point where they’re going to side with Big Chemical in the Supreme Court, watch out for angry moms, because we’re here; we’re ready.”
But there’s a settlement on the table. Bayer said it expects the ruling to contain the Roundup litigation after decades of legal battles and noted that Monsanto is continuing to pursue final approval of a $7.25 billion class-action settlement to resolve glyphosate cancer claims. Christopher Seeger, proposed class counsel in the settlement, said: “This Supreme Court ruling wrongly slams the courthouse door on Americans sickened by pesticides, and underscores why we negotiated a $7.25 billion settlement that guarantees compensation to Roundup victims regardless of today’s decision.”
Whether that settlement satisfies the MAHA movement is another question entirely. For a lot of these families, this was never purely about money. It was about accountability — about making a corporation answer for what they believe was a deliberate decision to keep a cancer warning off a product millions of Americans used on their lawns, their farms, and their food.
The ruling doesn’t end all litigation. While the ruling prohibits failure-to-warn claims from moving forward, Monsanto can still face lawsuits under other claims. And Congress, as Massie pointed out, still has options. But the MAHA movement didn’t come to Washington to wait on Congress. They came because they believed this administration would fight differently. Right now, a lot of them aren’t so sure.
Sources: Daily Caller News Foundation, CNBC, The Hill, E&E News, NPR, Philadelphia Inquirer, MS NOW