the bipartisan No Immunity for Glyphosate Act (HR 7601). The legislation will undo the February 18 Executive Order that promotes the use of glyphosate and insulates manufacturers of…
Undo the executive order promoting glyphosate and insulating manufacturers from liability.
Occurrences
the bipartisan No Immunity for Glyphosate Act (HR 7601). The legislation will undo the February 18 Executive Order that promotes the use of glyphosate and insulates manufacturers of
Evidence
The White House says the president ordered the federal government to treat elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides as critical to national defense, delegated DPA authority to Agriculture, and stated that domestic producers should not be put at risk. The order expressly says it confers the immunity available under the Defense Production Act.
AP reported that the proposed $7.25 billion Roundup settlement was still facing legal delays, with a hearing set for July and a related Supreme Court decision expected by late June. The article describes the underlying glyphosate liability dispute as still active rather than resolved.
The Federal Register published EO 14387, signed February 18, 2026, finding glyphosate-based herbicides central to national security, delegating Defense Production Act authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to ensure supply, requiring implementation not to put domestic producers' corporate viability at risk, and conferring immunity under 50 U.S.C. 4557.
The White House said President Trump signed an executive order mobilizing the Defense Production Act to protect domestic production of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides, delegated DPA authority to USDA, and directed USDA to issue orders and regulations as needed.
Congress.gov lists H.R.7567 as introduced February 13, 2026, referred to the House Committee on Agriculture, with status 'Introduced' and zero amendments listed as of the retrieved page.
AP reported delays in a proposed $7.25 billion Roundup settlement and noted that the Supreme Court was weighing a case that could block thousands of state-court lawsuits against Bayer over alleged failure to warn of cancer risks from Roundup.
The Supreme Court held that FIFRA expressly preempts Durnell’s state-law failure-to-warn claim because it would require Monsanto to add a cancer warning to Roundup’s EPA-approved label. The Court noted EPA has not required cancer warnings on glyphosate-based pesticides like Roundup.
AP reported that the Supreme Court sided with Roundup maker Bayer/Monsanto in a ruling expected to block thousands of failure-to-warn lawsuits, and that Bayer said the ruling should result in dismissal of such lawsuits while it continued a proposed $7.25 billion settlement.
Assessments
The promised federal outcome has not occurred. The glyphosate Defense Production Act executive order remains the operative federal action, and later developments strengthened rather than reversed manufacturer liability protection, including the June 25, 2026 Supreme Court ruling limiting Roundup failure-to-warn claims. The available record does not show Massie enacted, sponsored, or materially advanced a successful reversal of the order, nor does it show a serious failed legislative or executive vehicle specifically undoing the order, so effort credit is not warranted on this evidence.
As of June 11, 2026, the February 18, 2026 White House executive order promoting glyphosate-based herbicides and extending Defense Production Act immunity remains in place, and reporting from May 22, 2026 indicates the underlying Roundup liability fight is still ongoing rather than undone. There is no evidence here that Thomas Massie, a U.S. representative without unilateral power to revoke an executive order, has secured a legislative or executive reversal or materially advanced one to completion. Because the promised outcome has not happened but Massie is still in office and the record does not show a completed failed end-state after a serious concrete attempt, the safest judgment is unresolved rather than delivered or never.