FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
25% Positive
Analyzed from 301 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#court#roundup#labeling#cancer#opinion#saying#israel#pushed#scotus#legalize

Discussion (12 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
>The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Actpreempts a state-law labeling requirement that differs from the federal labeling requirements imposed under FIFRA.
In other words, they don't have immunity from cancer lawsuits. They have immunity from cancer lawsuits stemming from being noncompliant with state labeling laws.
Actual ruling seems reasonable from a legal perspective. It is the EPA's job to determine if a chemical is safe. If they say it is, why is it the court's job to say otherwise?
Most Americans do not understand the constitutional role of the judicial branch, and rhetoric like this exploits that in ways that are really bad for the integrity of our government and political discourse.
This court decision wasn't about legalizing Roundup. Roundup was already 100% legal before this court decision, so there is zero reason for anyone to have pushed this court to legalize it. Even if the US suddenly decided to make Roundup illegal to use, in what way would that prevent Israel (or any other country outside of the US) from using it? Not only is what you are saying factually wrong, it wouldn't make any sense even if it were true.