The Supreme Court's April oral arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell revealed a divided bench on whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state failure-to-warn claims when the EPA has not mandated specific labeling for glyphosate in Roundup. Justices pressed both sides on federal preemption limits and the impact of evolving scientific data, leaving the outcome uncertain ahead of a June ruling. This procedural posture and the 4-4 ideological split on the nine-justice Court sustain competitive balance in trader assessments of a Monsanto-favorable decision. A ruling favoring preemption could resolve thousands of pending state lawsuits, while a narrower holding preserving state claims would extend litigation exposure for Bayer. Any late term opinion clarifying the scope of FIFRA preemption would likely shift implied probabilities before resolution.
Riepilogo sperimentale generato dall'AI con riferimento ai dati di Polymarket. Questo non è un consiglio di trading e non ha alcun ruolo nella risoluzione di questo mercato. · AggiornatoSCOTUS rules in favor of Monsanto?
SCOTUS rules in favor of Monsanto?
NUOVO
NUOVO
31 dic 2026
NUOVO
NUOVO
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 oral arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell revealed a divided bench on whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state failure-to-warn claims when the EPA has not mandated specific labeling for glyphosate in Roundup. Justices pressed both sides on federal preemption limits and the impact of evolving scientific data, leaving the outcome uncertain ahead of a June ruling. This procedural posture and the 4-4 ideological split on the nine-justice Court sustain competitive balance in trader assessments of a Monsanto-favorable decision. A ruling favoring preemption could resolve thousands of pending state lawsuits, while a narrower holding preserving state claims would extend litigation exposure for Bayer. Any late term opinion clarifying the scope of FIFRA preemption would likely shift implied probabilities before resolution.
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.
Mercato aperto: Apr 9, 2026, 5:07 PM ET
Volume
$207Data di fine
31 dic 2026Mercato aperto
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 oral arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell revealed a divided bench on whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state failure-to-warn claims when the EPA has not mandated specific labeling for glyphosate in Roundup. Justices pressed both sides on federal preemption limits and the impact of evolving scientific data, leaving the outcome uncertain ahead of a June ruling. This procedural posture and the 4-4 ideological split on the nine-justice Court sustain competitive balance in trader assessments of a Monsanto-favorable decision. A ruling favoring preemption could resolve thousands of pending state lawsuits, while a narrower holding preserving state claims would extend litigation exposure for Bayer. Any late term opinion clarifying the scope of FIFRA preemption would likely shift implied probabilities before resolution.
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.
Volume
$207Data di fine
31 dic 2026Mercato aperto
Apr 9, 2026, 5:07 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...The Supreme Court's April oral arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell revealed a divided bench on whether the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state failure-to-warn claims when the EPA has not mandated specific labeling for glyphosate in Roundup. Justices pressed both sides on federal preemption limits and the impact of evolving scientific data, leaving the outcome uncertain ahead of a June ruling. This procedural posture and the 4-4 ideological split on the nine-justice Court sustain competitive balance in trader assessments of a Monsanto-favorable decision. A ruling favoring preemption could resolve thousands of pending state lawsuits, while a narrower holding preserving state claims would extend litigation exposure for Bayer. Any late term opinion clarifying the scope of FIFRA preemption would likely shift implied probabilities before resolution.
Riepilogo sperimentale generato dall'AI con riferimento ai dati di Polymarket. Questo non è un consiglio di trading e non ha alcun ruolo nella risoluzione di questo mercato. · Aggiornato
Fai attenzione ai link esterni.
Fai attenzione ai link esterni.
Domande frequenti