Below is an Action Alert from our sister organization, National Health Freedom Action that we thought you might be interested in.
Take Action Today: Tell your own Congressman and the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee to protect the right to sue for injuries from agricultural pesticides!
On Tuesday July 22, at 10:30am EST, the full US House Appropriations Committee is scheduled to markup the federal Fiscal Year 2026 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Bill, known as the “Interior Appropriations Bill.”
The current Section 453 of this proposed legislation would offer agricultural chemical manufacturers de facto liability immunity when their products injure people. A “markup” is the formal process of reviewing, amending, and voting on a bill before it moves to the full House floor. People who want to watch Tuesday’s hearing can use this link.
Section 453 and Liability Immunity
Section 453 of the Interior Appropriations Bill states:
“PESTICIDES: SEC. 453. None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to issue or adopt any guidance or any policy, take any regulatory action, or approve any labeling or change to such labeling that is inconsistent with or in any respect different from the conclusion of—
(a) a human health assessment performed pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.); or (b) a carcinogenicity classification for a pesticide.”
Even though the word “liability” isn’t used, Section 453 helps pesticide companies avoid legal exposure, especially in state courts, in a few key ways:
1. Freezes the Scientific Narrative in Favor of EPA’s Determination:
If EPA says a pesticide doesn’t cause cancer, no other federal agency can contradict that—not even in public guidance or labeling. This includes the EPA itself, should it later want to update its view. As an example, If new science emerges suggesting a pesticide is dangerous (e.g., glyphosate), no new warning or label change can be made if it contradicts the original EPA ruling.
2. Removes the Basis for Failure-to-Warn Lawsuits:
Many liability cases argue that companies should have warned consumers about product dangers. But if labels must match EPA’s determination, and EPA said “no warning needed,” a company can argue: “We legally weren’t allowed to include a warning — the government forbade it.”
Take Action!
1. Use the link below to email your US House Representative.
2. Call the Appropriations Committee Chair, Congressman Tom Cole.
Let the House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole know that you oppose Section 453—call his office and leave a message or talk to an aide about this important issue!
