Crops News

National ag coalition: California Prop 65 needs to be halted

Published:

A national agriculture coalition is going to court today with a reasonable request: halt California’s extreme Prop 65 listing of glyphosate until the judge can consider all of the facts.

Despite scientific findings from hundreds of studies and conclusions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and regulatory agencies around the world that glyphosate is safe for use, California ignored facts, data, and science, when it added glyphosate to the state’s Prop 65 list.

“While farmers are readying our fields and making plans to put seeds in the ground, California is engaging in aggressive legal wrangling, placing us at risk to crippling liability for using a product that hundreds of studies and the U.S. EPA say is safe for use,” said Gordon Stoner, President of the National Association of Wheat Growers. “We intend to make clear in this hearing that agriculture is under attack and implementation of this erroneous Prop 65 listing for glyphosate should be halted until there is a final ruling from the judge.”

On Tuesday, the agriculture coalition will make the case for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, which would halt the implementation of the Prop 65 listing until a final ruling is decided by the court.

The National Association of Wheat Growers are the lead plaintiff in the case against California filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The plaintiffs include the Agribusiness Association of Iowa, the Agricultural Retailers Association, Associated Industries of Missouri, Iowa Soybean Association, Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, CropLife America, Missouri Farm Bureau, National Corn Growers Association, North Dakota Grain Growers Association, South Dakota Agri-Business Association, and United States Durum Growers Association. In December, the group filed a temporary injunction asking the court to halt the regulation.

Any views or opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect those of AGDAILY. Comments on this article reflect the sole opinions of their writers.
Previous Article Next Page