(Daily Signal)—Despite the backlash since Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling shielding Monsanto from liability, the Environmental Protection Agency is pushing ahead on glyphosate, telling the Daily Signal how it plans to navigate the Make America Healthy Again movement’s growing outrage.
In a 7-2 decision on Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, will be shielded from liability over Roundup, its widely used brand of weed and grass killer. In response, MAHA activists are firing back at the Trump administration and Zeldin’s leadership at the EPA.
The EPA told the Daily Signal it is conducting a scientific review of the pesticide.
“The EPA is committed to advancing science-based innovation and stewardship in pesticide use. Working closely with federal partners, the agency is promoting more sustainable practices, including steps to minimize reliance on preharvest desiccation applications of glyphosate,” a spokesperson at the EPA told the Daily Signal.
“This year, EPA is undertaking a comprehensive, transparent, and rigorous scientific review of glyphosate to evaluate its use and ensure decisions are fully aligned with the best available evidence and public health and environmental protections.”
The case at the center of the Supreme Court’s ruling was filed by Missouri resident John Durnell, who used Roundup and later developed cancer. Durnell initially won a large jury award in Missouri after arguing that Monsanto failed to put a cancer warning on the product label.
Monsanto fought the verdict, arguing that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) already required EPA approval of the label, so states could not force additional warnings.
“Because Durnell’s state tort claim would impose a pesticide labeling requirement ‘in addition to or different from’ the label required by EPA, FIFRA expressly preempts Durnell’s claim,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote.
The EPA’s stance, in which it states that the pesticide is safe for human health when used as directed on the label, is counter to MAHA’s outlook, and also to the views of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
According to the EPA’s website, the agency has found “no risks of concern to human health when glyphosate is used in accordance with its current label.” It also states that glyphosate is “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.”
Outside the agency, many members of the farming and agriculture industry have likewise strongly defended the pesticide. Some growers say glyphosate products not only control weeds effectively but also contribute to healthier soil by enabling spraying instead of tilling.
“Glyphosate remains one of the most replied upon and widely used tools for American farmers, sustaining the productivity, affordability, and resilience of U.S. agriculture,” the EPA spokesperson told the Daily Signal.
“Growers rely on crop protection options to remain competitive and ensure a stable domestic food supply, safeguarding it against the insects, diseases, and weeds that would otherwise reduce yields, raise costs, and threaten the availability of affordable food.”
Despite that support, MAHA has criticized the EPA’s reliance on studies for pesticides like glyphosate, focusing on alleged industry influence and potential conflicts of interest. Critics argue that many of the toxicity and safety studies the agency uses are paid for and submitted by the chemical companies themselves.
When asked what the agency’s upcoming glyphosate review would look like, the EPA outlined several steps.
The agency will increase transparency by expanding public access to underlying data and scientific rationale used in glyphosate assessments; evaluate independent, peer-reviewed research in assessing potential cancer and developmental risks; and look for opportunities to reduce unnecessary exposure, especially in residential settings and around schools.
Further, the EPA plans to work with states, the Department of Agriculture, and the Department of Health and Human Services to promote integrated pest management and alternative weed control strategies that lower chemical reliance where feasible.
It also will work with both departments to develop a research-and-evaluation framework for cumulative exposure across chemical classes in the food supply, as well as strengthen monitoring of residues in food and water, in coordination with federal partners.
“EPA’s goal is clear: protect children, support farmers, and ensure that decisions are driven by science, not politics or special interests,” the agency noted.
The EPA’s deadline for the completion of glyphosate’s registration review is set for Oct. 1, 2026.
Two Storms, One Harvest
Every food crisis in living memory has been a one-shock event. The 2008 price spike was a commodity bubble. The 2020 shortages were a logistics failure. The 2022 grain scare was a war on one exporter’s ports. Each time, the system bent, adjusted, and recovered, and each time the experts assured us afterward that global markets are simply too big and too diversified to fail.
What nobody in Washington seems eager to discuss is that 2026 is shaping up to be something the modern food system has never actually faced. Two independent shocks, one climatic and one geopolitical, are converging on the same harvest cycle at the same time. Not sequentially. Simultaneously.
Start with the weather. The Pacific Ocean is currently building toward what forecasters now openly call a record event. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center puts the odds of at least a strong El Niño near 88 percent, with roughly two in three odds it reaches “very strong” status, the tier reserved for perhaps three or four events in the entire satellite era. Every major global model now projects a median peak in Super El Niño territory, and most of them project it exceeding the 2015-16 event, which until now held the modern record. Sea surface anomalies were already brushing the super threshold in mid-July, months before these events normally peak. The atmosphere has already shifted into El Niño mode, and the event is forecast to crest in late fall and early winter.
This is not about “climate change.” It’s about the standard cycles of weather, and the cycle we’re currently in is one that has likely devastated societies in the past. We’re better prepared as a society today, but not all Americans are equally prepared.
Serious households have started doing the quiet math on their own. Grocery bills tell part of the story, and the forecast maps tell the rest, which is why long-term food storage has moved from fringe hobby to mainstream line item in the family budget, with established suppliers like Heaven’s Harvest seeing demand from people who five years ago would have rolled their eyes at the idea. That instinct is not paranoia. It is pattern recognition, and the pattern is worth walking through carefully.
Editor’s Note: Heaven’s Harvest IS a sponsor, but the warnings of this article are real and would be written even if we didn’t have a survival food sponsor. With that said, those who take advantage of what they offer can use promo code “Patriot” for 15% off.
The Fertilizer Clock Is Already Running
While the Pacific warms, the second shock has been unfolding in the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict with Iran turned the world’s most important energy chokepoint into a contested waterway, and the consequences reach far beyond the gas pump. Roughly a third of global fertilizer trade moves through Hormuz, and the disruption sent urea prices up 86 percent year over year by March, with a 53 percent jump in a single month.
The World Bank projects energy prices rising about 24 percent in 2026 and fertilizer about 31 percent. By its own accounting, fertilizer prices ran 35 percent higher in the first five months of this year than the same period last year.
Here is the mechanism the nightly news will not explain. Fertilizer is not a grocery item. It is a time-delayed input. The nitrogen a farmer in Iowa or Punjab could not afford to apply this spring does not show up as a problem this spring. It shows up as a thinner harvest six to twelve months later.
The World Bank’s own food security brief concedes that the effects of reduced applications earlier this season “are likely to become visible only later in harvest outcomes.” Translate that from institutional language into plain English and it means this. The damage is already done, it is already in the ground, and we are simply waiting for it to arrive on the shelf.
Now check the calendar. Six to twelve months from the spring planting season lands us squarely in late 2026 and early 2027. Which is precisely when the strongest El Niño in the instrumental record is forecast to peak, bringing its signature droughts to Southeast Asia, Australia, southern Africa, northern Brazil, and South Asia, the very regions that grow the world’s rice, sugar, and oilseeds.
The World Bank warns openly that a strong El Niño “could disrupt multiple crop belts simultaneously” on top of the conflict-driven input costs. Their baseline projection assumes the Middle East disruptions ease by autumn. What in the last two years of Middle East history suggests that assumption is safe?
The System Has No Slack Left
The comfortable answer is that global markets always adjust. But adjustment requires slack, and the slack is gone. Global cereal production is expected to decline from last year’s records even before El Niño does its work. The UN World Food Programme, hardly a den of right-wing preppers, is calling this the most significant disruption to its supply chains since Covid and the invasion of Ukraine, and its supply chain director put the stakes bluntly.
Today’s supply chain challenges are tomorrow’s hunger crisis.
There is also a political dimension that markets cannot price. When food gets scarce, governments do not behave like economists. They behave like politicians. Export bans, hoarding mandates, and panic buying at the national level turned the modest rice shortfall of 2008 into a global crisis, and analysts are already warning that import-dependent nations are the first dominoes.
The 2015-16 Super El Niño, a far weaker event than what is now forecast, threw tens of millions into food stress across Africa and Asia. This one is projected to be stronger, and it arrives with fertilizer already rationed by price and shipping lanes already contested by missiles.
What Joseph Knew
Scripture does not treat preparation for lean years as faithlessness. It treats it as wisdom delivered in advance to those willing to act on it.
Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt: And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt.
Joseph did not respond to that warning with a hashtag or a committee. He stored grain during the years of abundance, and when the famine came, Egypt stood while its neighbors begged. The lesson is not that famine is certain. It is that the time to prepare is precisely when preparation still looks optional.
Nobody who filled a pantry in a year of plenty has ever regretted it, and nobody standing in an empty aisle has ever been glad he waited for certainty.
None of this calls for panic, and panic is the enemy of sound judgment anyway. It calls for the same unglamorous prudence our grandparents considered ordinary. Keep some cash margin, know your local growers, and put real food in deep storage while it is cheap and available, because the entire arc of this story is that cheap and available is a closing window.
Families looking for a straightforward place to start can visit Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code Patriot for 15 percent off long-term storable food. The forecasts may yet soften, the strait may yet reopen, and we should pray they do. But hope is a fine thing to hold and a foolish thing to eat.
