MAHA at odds with Trump over Supreme Court's glyphosate case, farm bill

A Supreme Court case and a bill moving through Congress this week are set to test the bonds of Republicans and the Make America Healthy Again movement, following a near rupture in February over the weed killer glyphosate. 

The court will hear a case Monday to decide whether federal law preempts state-level lawsuits alleging glyphosate, the chemical in Bayer‘s herbicide Roundup, causes cancer. And the U.S. House is expected to take up the farm bill this week, a massive agricultural policy measure that includes new protections for the chemical. 

The MAHA movement, a coalition of activists who push for healthy food and eschew chemicals, helped deliver President Donald Trump back to the White House after their preferred presidential candidate, now-Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., dropped out of the election and endorsed the president. The group hates glyphosate, which is the most commonly used herbicide in the U.S. and integral to many farm operations.

The Supreme Court arguments and the farm bill put MAHA squarely at odds with Trump and the majority of Republicans in Congress. It comes just months after a prior blowup when Trump signed an executive order to boost domestic production of glyphosate, a break that caused Kennedy to step in and do damage control. And with the 2026 midterm election less than seven months away and Trump’s approval rating down in polls, keeping the coalition intact could be critical for Republicans who are racing to maintain their slim majorities in both chambers of Congress.

“It has been a really, really rough few months because we have an attack coming from the executive branch, the judicial branch and over in Congress,” said Kelly Ryerson, a MAHA advocate who goes by the moniker “the Glyphosate Girl” on social media.

“The combination of the executive order and going to bat for Bayer at the Supreme Court are really inexcusable,” Ryerson said. “And I think it showed a deep disconnect between what the administration thinks that MAHA cares about and what is actually true.”

For now, the White House appears firmly in glyphosate’s court. 

The Environmental Protection Agency, which regulates pesticides and herbicides, does not classify glyphosate as a carcinogen and does not require glyphosate labels to disclose cancer risk. But many individuals have sued, alleging they got cancer from Roundup use, and arguing that Bayer and Monsanto, which made glyphosate before Bayer acquired the company in 2018, failed to warn consumers of that risk. Kennedy in 2018 won nearly $290 million for a man in one such case. 

The administration will argue on behalf of Bayer before the Supreme Court, saying in an amicus brief that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act preempts the “failure to warn” claims hounding Bayer. Without that preemption, the brief says, manufacturers would be bound to adhere to a patchwork of 50 different labeling requirements in each state. 

“[I]f labeling tells users that a pesticide likely causes cancer in Missouri, might cause cancer in Illinois, definitely causes cancer in Tennessee, and is anyone’s guess in Iowa, users will not know whom to believe,” the U.S. solicitor general’s office wrote in an amicus brief on the case. “Lost in that noise: EPA’s considered judgments about what warnings are actually necessary to protect public health, and any hope of uniformity.”

The farm bill, meanwhile, includes a provision that MAHA advocates claim is a “liability shield” to protect pesticide manufacturers. The bill would prohibit any states and courts from penalizing or holding “liable any entity for failing to comply with requirements that would require labeling or packaging that is in addition to or different from the labeling or packaging approved by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson, R-Pa., who is leading the farm bill, said MAHA advocates upset with the language are “emotional-driven, need to take time to read the bill.” Thompson also contended that the bill preserves the ability for states to alter labels if they go through the EPA first.

“This bill is just about labeling, and making sure that the labeling is done in a way with the highest level of science,” he said. “If a state wants to have additional provisions for labeling, they only have to go through the EPA to make that happen, it will be on the label.” 

Ryerson, asked to respond to Thompson, said it’s “extremely disgusting that someone would come out and call us emotional, when what we’re just trying to do is make people healthy,” and contended that Thompson’s bill does include a liability shield. 

“I would also like to challenge, if he wants to go one-on-one and debate what that bill actually says, I am totally game because he is lying. This is a pesticide liability shield,” she said. 

The Republican embrace of glyphosate presents an opportunity for Democrats to try to win over MAHA in their own way.

“The White House’s stand is its stand, and we’re going to have the Supreme Court fight, we’re going to have the farm bill, and I think it continues to cause some rifts over there that you can’t really sugarcoat,” said Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-Maine, a Democratic ally of some MAHA causes. 

“There are a lot of people who got really excited about the MAHA idea who hadn’t been involved in politics before, so they’re not as embedded in voting for Republicans; it’s more who is going to stick up for these issues,” Pingree said. 

Ryerson agreed, saying MAHA is looking “for a champion and champions, which is what Kennedy was and is,” regardless of party — warning that the boiling frustration could lead MAHA to sit this election out. 

What “should be concerning to both parties, is that the likelihood isn’t that people are so frustrated in the MAHA movement, they go and vote for a Democrat, they just won’t vote,” she said. 

Pingree, along with Ryerson, will be attending a rally before the Supreme Court argument, arguing for the court to uphold the right to sue. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who is helping Pingree lead an amendment to strip the pesticide provision from the farm bill, will also attend.  

The White House appears to recognize the danger. They invited a group of MAHA advocates to meet with top officials earlier this month to tout the work they were doing on the advocates’ issues. 

Ryerson, who attended the huddle, said it was productive and allowed top advocates to vent their frustrations to administration officials. But she warned it may not be enough to keep MAHA in the MAGA fold.  

“My feeling was that the administration is taking those concerns to heart,” Ryerson said. “If the Supreme Court comes out in favor of Bayer, that is on this administration, because this case never even should have made it to the Supreme Court.”