Global life sciences giant Bayer is hailing the US Solicitor General’s backing as it pushes the Supreme Court to take up Durnell vs Bayer, a case the company says could reshape the future of Roundup litigation nationwide.

The government’s support for Bayer’s petition for a writ of certiorari—and its alignment with the company’s preemption arguments—adds significant weight to the bid, Bayer said.

At the heart of the showdown is a deep split among federal circuit courts over whether federal law overrides state failure-to-warn claims in Roundup personal-injury suits. Bayer argues that only the Supreme Court can resolve that conflict.

“The support of the U.S. Government is an important step and good news for U.S. farmers, who need regulatory clarity. The stakes could not be higher as the misapplication of federal law jeopardizes the availability of innovative tools for farmers and investments in the broader US economy,” said CEO Bill Anderson.

The company stresses that the preemption question extends far beyond herbicides. Similar language to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) appears in federal laws governing medical devices, poultry and meat products, and even motor vehicles. Bayer argues that businesses should not face state-law penalties for following federally mandated labeling rules.

A Supreme Court ruling that affirms the preemption defense could, Bayer says, be pivotal in resolving tens of thousands of pending Roundup cases—most built on failure-to-warn claims. The company points to determinations by the EPA and regulators worldwide who have repeatedly found glyphosate, Roundup’s active ingredient, can be used safely.

The push is part of Bayer’s broader litigation-containment strategy, which the company says aims to significantly reduce cases by the end of 2026, consistent with its Q3 guidance.