The Supreme Court's April 27 oral arguments in Monsanto Company v. Durnell drove the 88% implied probability of a ruling favoring Monsanto, as several justices—including Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh—pressed skepticism toward state failure-to-warn claims overriding EPA-approved pesticide labels under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act's uniformity provision. Monsanto argued that allowing Missouri's $1.25 million jury verdict for inadequate Roundup cancer warnings would create a patchwork of standards conflicting with federal registration, backed by the Trump administration and EPA's longstanding findings that glyphosate poses no carcinogenic risk. While divided, fewer tough questions targeted Monsanto's counsel, signaling conservative leanings in a 6-3 majority court amid over 100,000 similar lawsuits; a decision is expected by July 2026.
Resumen experimental generado por IA con datos de Polymarket. Esto no es asesoramiento de trading y no influye en cómo se resuelve este mercado. · Actualizado¿SCOTUS se pronuncia a favor de Monsanto?
¿SCOTUS se pronuncia a favor de Monsanto?
Sí
NUEVO
NUEVO
31 dic 2026
Sí
NUEVO
NUEVO
31 dic 2026
This market will resolve to “Yes” if the Supreme Court, in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, rules that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state failure-to-warn claims by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
The Supreme Court will be considered to rule that FIFRA preempts such claims if it issues a decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell holding that FIFRA preempts state failure-to-warn claims, including ruling that manufacturers cannot be held liable under state law for failing to include warnings not required or approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.
If the Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell affirms that state-law failure-to-warn claims are not preempted, allows such claims to proceed, or otherwise declines to find federal preemption, the market will resolve to “No”. If the case is dismissed, settled, or otherwise disposed of without a merits decision within this market’s timeframe, the market will resolve to “No”. If no Supreme Court ruling on the merits of Monsanto Co. v. Durnell is issued by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the U.S. Supreme Court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.The Supreme Court's April 27 oral arguments in Monsanto Company v. Durnell drove the 88% implied probability of a ruling favoring Monsanto, as several justices—including Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh—pressed skepticism toward state failure-to-warn claims overriding EPA-approved pesticide labels under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act's uniformity provision. Monsanto argued that allowing Missouri's $1.25 million jury verdict for inadequate Roundup cancer warnings would create a patchwork of standards conflicting with federal registration, backed by the Trump administration and EPA's longstanding findings that glyphosate poses no carcinogenic risk. While divided, fewer tough questions targeted Monsanto's counsel, signaling conservative leanings in a 6-3 majority court amid over 100,000 similar lawsuits; a decision is expected by July 2026.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if the Supreme Court, in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, rules that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state failure-to-warn claims by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
The Supreme Court will be considered to rule that FIFRA preempts such claims if it issues a decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell holding that FIFRA preempts state failure-to-warn claims, including ruling that manufacturers cannot be held liable under state law for failing to include warnings not required or approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.
If the Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell affirms that state-law failure-to-warn claims are not preempted, allows such claims to proceed, or otherwise declines to find federal preemption, the market will resolve to “No”. If the case is dismissed, settled, or otherwise disposed of without a merits decision within this market’s timeframe, the market will resolve to “No”. If no Supreme Court ruling on the merits of Monsanto Co. v. Durnell is issued by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the U.S. Supreme Court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
The Supreme Court will be considered to rule that FIFRA preempts such claims if it issues a decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell holding that FIFRA preempts state failure-to-warn claims, including ruling that manufacturers cannot be held liable under state law for failing to include warnings not required or approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.
If the Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell affirms that state-law failure-to-warn claims are not preempted, allows such claims to proceed, or otherwise declines to find federal preemption, the market will resolve to “No”. If the case is dismissed, settled, or otherwise disposed of without a merits decision within this market’s timeframe, the market will resolve to “No”. If no Supreme Court ruling on the merits of Monsanto Co. v. Durnell is issued by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the U.S. Supreme Court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Mercado abierto: Apr 9, 2026, 5:07 PM ET
Volumen
$83Fecha de finalización
31 dic 2026Mercado abierto
Apr 9, 2026, 5:07 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...This market will resolve to “Yes” if the Supreme Court, in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, rules that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state failure-to-warn claims by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
The Supreme Court will be considered to rule that FIFRA preempts such claims if it issues a decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell holding that FIFRA preempts state failure-to-warn claims, including ruling that manufacturers cannot be held liable under state law for failing to include warnings not required or approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.
If the Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell affirms that state-law failure-to-warn claims are not preempted, allows such claims to proceed, or otherwise declines to find federal preemption, the market will resolve to “No”. If the case is dismissed, settled, or otherwise disposed of without a merits decision within this market’s timeframe, the market will resolve to “No”. If no Supreme Court ruling on the merits of Monsanto Co. v. Durnell is issued by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the U.S. Supreme Court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.The Supreme Court's April 27 oral arguments in Monsanto Company v. Durnell drove the 88% implied probability of a ruling favoring Monsanto, as several justices—including Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh—pressed skepticism toward state failure-to-warn claims overriding EPA-approved pesticide labels under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act's uniformity provision. Monsanto argued that allowing Missouri's $1.25 million jury verdict for inadequate Roundup cancer warnings would create a patchwork of standards conflicting with federal registration, backed by the Trump administration and EPA's longstanding findings that glyphosate poses no carcinogenic risk. While divided, fewer tough questions targeted Monsanto's counsel, signaling conservative leanings in a 6-3 majority court amid over 100,000 similar lawsuits; a decision is expected by July 2026.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if the Supreme Court, in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, rules that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) preempts state failure-to-warn claims by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
The Supreme Court will be considered to rule that FIFRA preempts such claims if it issues a decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell holding that FIFRA preempts state failure-to-warn claims, including ruling that manufacturers cannot be held liable under state law for failing to include warnings not required or approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.
If the Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell affirms that state-law failure-to-warn claims are not preempted, allows such claims to proceed, or otherwise declines to find federal preemption, the market will resolve to “No”. If the case is dismissed, settled, or otherwise disposed of without a merits decision within this market’s timeframe, the market will resolve to “No”. If no Supreme Court ruling on the merits of Monsanto Co. v. Durnell is issued by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the U.S. Supreme Court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
The Supreme Court will be considered to rule that FIFRA preempts such claims if it issues a decision in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell holding that FIFRA preempts state failure-to-warn claims, including ruling that manufacturers cannot be held liable under state law for failing to include warnings not required or approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.
If the Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell affirms that state-law failure-to-warn claims are not preempted, allows such claims to proceed, or otherwise declines to find federal preemption, the market will resolve to “No”. If the case is dismissed, settled, or otherwise disposed of without a merits decision within this market’s timeframe, the market will resolve to “No”. If no Supreme Court ruling on the merits of Monsanto Co. v. Durnell is issued by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET, this market will resolve to “No”.
The resolution source for this market will be official information from the U.S. Supreme Court; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Volumen
$83Fecha de finalización
31 dic 2026Mercado abierto
Apr 9, 2026, 5:07 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...The Supreme Court's April 27 oral arguments in Monsanto Company v. Durnell drove the 88% implied probability of a ruling favoring Monsanto, as several justices—including Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh—pressed skepticism toward state failure-to-warn claims overriding EPA-approved pesticide labels under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act's uniformity provision. Monsanto argued that allowing Missouri's $1.25 million jury verdict for inadequate Roundup cancer warnings would create a patchwork of standards conflicting with federal registration, backed by the Trump administration and EPA's longstanding findings that glyphosate poses no carcinogenic risk. While divided, fewer tough questions targeted Monsanto's counsel, signaling conservative leanings in a 6-3 majority court amid over 100,000 similar lawsuits; a decision is expected by July 2026.
Resumen experimental generado por IA con datos de Polymarket. Esto no es asesoramiento de trading y no influye en cómo se resuelve este mercado. · Actualizado
Cuidado con los enlaces externos.
Cuidado con los enlaces externos.
Preguntas frecuentes