Why has China shifted all its soybean orders to South America?

The first noose: Seeds are too expensive to buy. Monsanto raised seed prices by 80-fold. Farmers cannot afford them and must take out loans. Those who attempt to save seeds for replanting face lawsuits from Monsanto—saving seeds constitutes patent infringement. Moreover, these patented seeds must be used in conjunction with Monsanto’s proprietary herbicides and pesticides; using alternatives risks killing both weeds and cotton plants alike. Farmers are effectively chained to an assembly line, harvested year after year. The second noose: Insects evolve. After three or four years of bountiful harvests, the cotton bollworm gradually developed resistance to Bt toxin. The so-called 'Bt cotton' ceased to be insect-resistant. Two-thirds of cotton fields suffered yield declines. India’s golden era of cotton lasted only three brief years—from 2002 to 2005. The third noose: Indigenous cotton varieties vanish. Pollen from genetically modified cotton spreads on the wind, contaminating entire cotton-growing ecosystems. India’s native cotton varieties—cultivated for millennia—were effectively eradicated through genetic 'hybridization.' Crop uniformity eliminated resilience: when drought or pest outbreaks strike, entire cotton fields fail simultaneously, with no buffer whatsoever. Debt snowballed catastrophically. Between the introduction of GM cotton and 2011, approximately 300,000 Indian farmers died by suicide. On average, one farmer ingested pesticide or hanged himself every 30 minutes. Three hundred thousand lives. One seed. Monsanto’s product launch events never mention this. Seeds are chains; Roundup is the noose. Within Monsanto’s business model lie two core components: Patented seeds are the chains; Roundup herbicide is the noose. The first layer of the noose: Human cost In 2015, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as 'probably carcinogenic to humans.' How did Monsanto respond? It insisted Roundup was harmless. Its Global Strategy Vice President publicly claimed Roundup had a '40-year history of safe use.' Yet science—and courts—delivered different verdicts. In August 2018, a California jury ruled that Monsanto bore responsibility for school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson’s non-Hodgkin lymphoma—a disease linked to his long-term use of Roundup—and ordered $289 million in damages. This was the first domino to fall. Thereafter, lawsuits cascaded like an avalanche. By the end of 2025, Bayer (which had acquired Monsanto) faced approximately 180,000 Roundup-related lawsuits. Bayer has paid over $10 billion in settlements and set aside another $16 billion to address pending litigation. In 2025 alone, a Missouri jury awarded $611 million; a Georgia jury found Bayer guilty of 'willfully concealing' glyphosate’s dangers and ordered nearly $2.1 billion in damages. 2026…

A landmark case with legal fees totaling RMB 4.6 billion! Which law firms secured this windfall?

Author | Xuelü First Published | Xuelü Study Abroad Consulting Center (WeChat ID: TopLawSchool) Recently, the Roundup herbicide litigation against Bayer AG has entered settlement negotiation stages, with a proposed settlement amount reaching $7.25 billion. Simultaneously, plaintiffs’ attorneys have filed a fee application seeking $675 million (approximately RMB 4.6 billion). If approved by the court, this would rank among the largest attorney-fee awards in legal history. Six law firms—Holland Law Firm, Ketchmark & McCreight, Seeger Weiss, Motley Rice, Williams Hart & Boundas, and Waters Kraus Paul & Siegel—jointly submitted this fee application last Friday, requesting compensation for their work negotiating and finalizing the settlement agreement. This agreement aims to resolve all current and future lawsuits alleging that Bayer’s Roundup herbicide causes cancer. Christopher Seeger of Seeger Weiss stated in a press release that the proposed Roundup settlement represents one of the largest class-action settlements ever reached—and the largest such settlement in Missouri history—adding that the requested 9.3% attorney fee constitutes only a fraction of the typical one-third benchmark fee courts approve in major class-action settlements. Mike Ketchmark of Ketchmark & McCreight wrote in an email: 'What makes this case unique is that the class-action attorney team will continue working on it for another 17 years; this fee request reflects nearly two decades of additional labor, risk, and expenses.' Other law firms named in the application have not yet responded to requests for comment. The six firms clarified that the $675 million will also be distributed among other law firms representing plaintiffs in this matter. Bayer’s subsidiary Monsanto issued a statement expressing anticipation for the finalization of this settlement, which would establish a long-term claims program funded by annual payments capped over a maximum period of 21 years. The agreement covers the vast majority of pending lawsuits but requires judicial approval and a minimum threshold of plaintiff participation. The company previously denied that Roundup’s primary ingredient…

Bayer's Monsanto unit urges Missouri judge to approve $7.25 billion Roundup settlement

6 days ago

Bayer's Monsanto unit urged a Missouri judge to approve a $7.25 billion settlement resolving thousands of Roundup cancer lawsuits. The company denies glyphosate causes cancer but seeks to resolve the litigation overhang weighing on its finances.

reuters

2026-01-19

Bayer Welcomes US Supreme Court Decision to Hear Roundup Appeal

2026-02-18

Bayer Proposes $7.25B Roundup Class Settlement Deal

2026-03-05

Bayer’s $7.25 billion Roundup class settlement advances

2026-04-26

Bayer's Supreme Court Case Could Impact Thousands of Roundup Lawsuits

2026-04-28

Supreme Court hears Bayer Roundup liability case with billions at stake