Bayer’s long-running battle over Roundup is heading into another decisive phase as a Missouri court considers whether to approve a proposed $7.25 billion settlement aimed at resolving tens of thousands of cancer claims tied to the weedkiller.
The settlement will come under scrutiny Monday in a St. Louis courtroom, where Judge Timothy Boyer is expected to hear arguments both supporting and challenging the agreement. While some attorneys representing plaintiffs view the deal as a practical route to compensation, others contend that claimants should retain the ability to pursue their cases individually.
Boyer is not expected to make an immediate decision following the hearing.
The dispute has remained one of Bayer’s biggest financial and legal burdens since the German company acquired Monsanto in 2018. The litigation has cost Bayer billions of dollars and continued to weigh on investor confidence as Chief Executive Bill Anderson works to reshape the company.
A previous settlement reached in 2020, valued at roughly $10 billion, resolved many existing Roundup cases but did not eliminate the possibility of additional claims.
Settlement targets about 65,000 claims
Bayer currently faces about 65,000 Roundup-related cases across U.S. state and federal courts. Plaintiffs allege that exposure to the weedkiller caused them to develop cancer, particularly non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
The proposed agreement is designed to address virtually all existing and future U.S. claims within its framework.
Under the proposal, eligible individuals could receive between $10,000 and $165,000. Payments would vary according to factors including the seriousness of the cancer, the claimant’s age at diagnosis and whether exposure occurred through household or workplace use.
Bayer and its Monsanto subsidiary continue to reject allegations that Roundup causes cancer. The company maintains that extensive scientific research has found glyphosate, the product’s principal active ingredient, to be safe.
Supporters of the settlement argue that it provides a clearer path to compensation at a time when the outcome of individual lawsuits has become increasingly uncertain.
Opponents take a different view. They argue that the proposed payments are inadequate and that the settlement could restrict people who might otherwise choose to take their cases to trial, including individuals who could bring claims in the future.
Monsanto has said it believes the agreement is fair and deserves final approval, pointing to support from attorneys representing tens of thousands of potential claimants.
Glyphosate remains at the heart of the dispute
The controversy surrounding Roundup has centered heavily on glyphosate and conflicting assessments of its potential health risks.
In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency later reached a different conclusion, determining that glyphosate was not likely to cause cancer in humans at expected real-world exposure levels.
The EPA does not currently require Roundup to carry a cancer warning on its label. The agency is also preparing an updated assessment of glyphosate’s potential risks, with completion expected later in 2026.
Meanwhile, Bayer has gained significant ground in its legal fight.
While the settlement process was underway, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Monsanto’s favor on the question of whether federal law governing Roundup’s labeling could override certain state-law claims. The decision weakened a central argument used by plaintiffs in thousands of cases.
That ruling has added another layer of uncertainty to the settlement debate—and made the Missouri court’s review an important moment for Bayer’s effort to finally draw a line under the Roundup litigation.
