Pesticide Immunity: The Same Bad Idea is Back
Background: A familiar fight at the Idaho Legislature
During the 2025 Idaho legislative session, pesticide manufacturers worked hard to pass a bill that would have granted them legal immunity if their products harmed neighbors, farmworkers, farmers, families or the environment. That proposal did not pass but we expect it to resurface as the 2026 Legislature convenes. They’re pushing it in Congress too.
The fight isn’t confined to Idaho. At the federal level, industry giants are lobbying Congress to enact pesticide immunity nationwide. Leading this charge is Bayer, the international agricultural and pharmaceutical corporation that acquired Monsanto in 2018. Bayer has faced billions of dollars in legal judgments and settlements arising from claims that exposure to Roundup—its most commonly used pesticide, has contributed to Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other cancers. Courts and juries have reached different outcomes across cases, but the volume of litigation is real—and it’s exactly why the industry is seeking immunity.
In Idaho’s 2025 legislative debate, Bayer was joined by ChemChina, a Chinese state-owned company that produces the herbicide paraquat—a pesticide that has been restricted or banned in many countries and is the subject of ongoing concern and litigation related to Parkinson’s disease. Instead of working to reduce harm or improve safety, these companies now seek a liability shield that would make it harder for Idahoans to hold manufacturers accountable when harm occurs.
Where do we go from here?
Pesticides play an important role in Idaho agriculture, and many farmers rely on them to manage weeds and protect crops. At the same time, pesticide exposure can carry real health and economic risks–especially for formworks, applicators, and people living near treated areas.
As ICL fights to protect clean air, clean water, healthy wildlife, and sustainable communities we also work to protect a basic principle that resonates across Idaho: the rules should be fair, and no industry should get special immunity when Idahoans are harmed. Accountability is part of how markets work–it incentivizes safer products, clear labeling, and responsible behavior.
A pesticide “liability shield” would:
Limit Idahoans’ ability to seek accountability in court when pesticide exposure causes harm–shifting costs and burdens away from manufacturers and onto families, employers, insurers, and taxpayers.
Put corporate protections ahead of public health and basic fairness–especially for farmers, farmworkers, and rural communities who may face the greatest exposure risks.
Weaken incentives for transparency and safer product design. When accountability disappears, risk doesn’t–it just gets redistributed.
This is an Idaho issue–about protecting our communities, keeping the courthouse doors open, and ensuring the true costs of harm aren’t pushed onto the public.
What can you do?
We urge Idaho lawmakers—and leaders across the country—to reject any effort to grant special legal immunity (a liability shield) to pesticide manufacturers.. Instead, we need policies that protect public health, strengthen environmental safeguards, and preserve access to justice for all Idahoans.
ICL will continue to work with farmers, farmworkers, public health partners, and Idaho communities to push back against proposals that undermine accountability and risk. Your voice matters–because early constituent input is one of the most effective ways to stop bad bills before they gain momentum.
