June 17, 2025
NC Farm Bureau and NC Chamber of Commerce inaccurately assert safety of pesticides amid battle to remove Section 19 from North Carolina’s Farm Act
Contact: Dr. Alexandra Muñoz
Raleigh, NC In early May, a section was quietly added to the state's Farm Act, SB 639, that would grant pesticide manufacturers de facto immunity against certain lawsuits. Though North Carolina already provides protection against frivolous lawsuits in the state's product liability code, Section 19 expands upon those protections to further shield pesticide manufacturers that provide products regulated under FIFRA.
On May 15, 2025, SB 639 was pulled from the senate floor and sent back to the Rules and Operations Committee after immense public pushback. On Thursday, June 12, and Friday, June 13, activists received personal notification from Republican lawmakers that Section 19 had been stripped from SB 639.
On Friday, June 13, the NC Farm Bureau sent out a call to action urging people to ask for the inclusion of Section 19. The North Carolina Chamber of Commerce sent a similar call to action on June 16. Both statements included inaccurate information regarding the “stringency” of Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the “rigorous EPA review process”.
Dr. Alexandra Muñoz, a molecular toxicologist, offered a response to these statements:
The regulatory framework outlined in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and implemented by the EPA is not rigorous or stringent from a toxicological perspective. This process does not require evaluation of the full product formulations, which is needed for accurate toxicological assessment of these products.
In addition, the EPA-approved labels do not reflect the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Numerous health impacts of various products regulated under FIFRA can be found in the peer-reviewed literature. The labels do not include warnings about the actual health risks of the products detailed in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
The 9th circuit court previously vacated the EPA’s assessment of glyphosate’s carcinogenicity.
Dr. Alexandra Munoz asserts that labels, such as those found on glyphosate-based herbicides, fail to warn consumers about the actual health risks:
There is substantial evidence proving that glyphosate-based herbicides are carcinogenic and lead to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The label on glyphosate-based herbicides does not reflect this scientifically proven health risk.
Though SB 639 has not been scheduled on this week’s legislative calendar, discussions on the bill could be held on the senate floor any day.