Not so fast – lawyers for cancer victims see “red flags” in Bayer’s $7.25 billion Roundup settlement deal
Listen to the audio version of this article (generated by AI).
A group of 14 law firms representing nearly 20,000 plaintiffs is seeking to intervene in Bayer’s $7.25 billion proposed class action settlement of Roundup litigation, citing concerns that the settlement deal will not be fair to cancer victims.
The group filed both a motion to intervene and a motion for an extension of time for court preliminary approval of the deal in St. Louis City Circuit Court in Missouri late on Feb. 24.
The law firms say the deal appears “unprecedented” and raises multiple “red flags”.
“It is hard to escape the impression that the proposed settlement would give Monsanto everything it desires—a near-complete release of liability for Monsanto and its parent company, Bayer AG—while giving inadequate consideration to many putative class members, who would surrender their substantive rights in exchange for settlement offers that may never result in payment,” the law firms state in their motion.
Bayer and a different group of plaintiffs’ lawyers filed the settlement proposal with the court Feb. 17, with a provision to seek preliminary court approval within a 15-day period.
But the opposing firms are seeking a 60-day extension of that “fast track” time frame, saying the “sheer scale and impact of the proposed settlement, together with concerns raised by its terms and how it was negotiated, warrant broader public participation and scrutiny.”
Bayer announced the proposed class action settlement on Feb. 17, proposing to pay amounts ranging from $10,000 to $165,000 on average to users of its glyphosate-based weed killing products who have non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), a type of blood cancer, or who develop it in the next several years.
Bayer has been fending off close to 200,000 claims since buying Roundup maker Monsanto in 2018. The company has so far paid billions of dollars in settlements and jury verdicts to tens of thousands of people suffering from NHL they blame on exposure to Roundup and other Monsanto glyphosate-based herbicide brands. At the core of those lawsuits are claims that the company failed to warn users of the risk of cancer.
The law firms seeking to intervene cited among other concerns a “scheme” that “heavily favors” occupational Roundup users such as farmers or commercial landscapers over residential users. Under the proposed payment schedule, an occupational claimant diagnosed before age 60 with aggressive NHL could receive, on average, $165,000, while a residential user with the same traits would average $40,000, the motion to intervene points out.
Additionally, they object to Bayer’s request that the court stay the thousands of lawsuits pending against the company in Missouri.
The law firms say the 600-page settlement agreement was “negotiated behind closed doors” and does not adequately represent the interests of the plaintiffs they represent.
In response to the opposition filings, Bayer said in a statement that it is “not surprised” and fully expects a “robust debate” about the settlement proposal.
“We remain confident that the long-term and well-financed proposed class settlement plan, which is supported by plaintiff law firms representing thousands of potential class members, is fair to all claimants, and warrants approval by the court,” the company said.
The plaintiffs’ legal team who negotiated the settlement proposal with Bayer said in a statement: “It is obvious that the proposed intervenors’ have reviewed the agreement over the last week, and are hopefully working as hard to communicate its terms to their clients as they are trying to delay compensation for the tens of thousands of Roundup victims who have waited a decade for justice.”
The team said in their statement that without a settlement, plaintiffs face “the risks of Monsanto filing for bankruptcy,” among other events that could hinder their ability to collect from the company in the future.
If approved, the proposed settlement would cover plaintiffs who allege they were exposed to Roundup products prior to February 17, 2026, and either currently are suffering from NHL or receive a diagnosis of NHL before the end of a 16-year period.
Bayer is hoping a looming US Supreme Court review will incentivize plaintiffs to agree to the settlement because if Bayer prevails in the Supreme Court case, future lawsuits against the company could be severely hampered.
Bayer maintains that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), which governs the registration, distribution, sale, and use of pesticides in the United States, preempts failure-to-warn claims against the company. Because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not established a definitive cancer link and has approved labels with no cancer warning, lawsuits claiming the company should have provided a cancer warning should be barred, the company says.
The Supreme Court agreed to weigh in on that issue and has set a hearing for April 27.
The company filed its opening brief in the case Monday.
Featured image by Getty Images for Unsplash+.
February 26, 2026 @ 1:28 pm
Everything came from the earth and returns to it even if in altered form and not really permanent. As for Gyphosate there is no definitive proof of any health concerns by users or otherwise. Rates of it detected in food are from use as a desiccating agent. May be good to use other methods. As for users in spraying there is no proof outside of manipulated court cases of it causing any cancer. Most of this targeting comes from the use of glyphosate on GMO crops and its subsequent political attacks if you want to talk about corrupt science. I’ve used glyphosate in backpack spraying everyday in spring and summer for about 45 years. Including a couple equipment failures over the years drenching me in the stuff. Never had any issues nor cancer except from sun exposure on top of head walking to classes in college without a hat in the 70′ s. Too many greedy people and lawyers wanting to make ill gained profit as well as misplaced views on modern genetic science.
February 26, 2026 @ 9:26 am
the poison that people put on the earth that gives them life makes for cancer causing malignant health.the chemicals made and spread across the earth,water,and air permeate through out all living organisms.the alteration there of causes irreparable harm to life.nature did not make this.man,in his arrogance decided that he was superior to nature.the fallacy: the fall of man. the markers indelible, the fate determined.as was said,we have met the enemy and it remains us.