Trump’s EPA Just Defied a Court Order to Immediately Ban a Harmful Herbicide

Farmers can keep spraying the product they already had.

iStock/Getty

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.

Last week, a federal appeals court delivered a ruling that effectively bans a group of widely used herbicides made by three of the globe’s biggest agrichemical firms: Bayer (formerly Monsanto), Corteva (formerly DuPont), and BASF. The reason: The weed-killing products, versions of the chemical dicamba, have a tendency to drift off-target and kill the wrong foliage, including neighbors’ crops. (More here.) The Environmental Protection Agency, the court ruled, had allowed the products’ continued use despite mounting evidence of harm. 

In an extraordinary move, the EPA announced late Monday it would only partially abide by the court order. The agency agreed to halt sale and distribution of the chemicals, but gave the green light to farmers to spray fields with “existing stocks that were in their possession on June 3, 2020, the effective date of the Court decision.” In the press release, the agency declared dicamba a “valuable pest control tool,” and declined to mention its propensity to stray from targeted fields.

“The Trump administration is again showing it has no regard for the rule of law,” George Kimbrell, legal director of the Center for Food Safety and lead counsel in the case, said in a statement. The EPA’s move to allow continued dicamba spraying “ignores the well-documented and overwhelming evidence of substantial drift harm to farmers from another disastrous spraying season,” and “ignores the comprehensive analysis by the Court of these harms.” He added: “All users who continue to not seek alternatives should be on notice that they are using a harmful, defective, and unlawful product. We will bring the EPA’s failure to abide by the Court’s order to the Court as expeditiously as possible.”

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate