Roundup Cancer Lawsuit: NHL Claims Against BayerRoundup Weedkiller — Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

By James J. Rosemergy | Updated May 2026

This page is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this page does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Carey & Danis LLC. Carey & Danis LLC is no longer accepting new Roundup cases.

The Roundup cancer lawsuit is one of the largest product liability battles in American legal history. For decades, Roundup — the world’s most widely used weedkiller — was marketed as safe for humans. The active ingredient, glyphosate, tells a very different story. Multiple scientific studies and major jury verdicts have linked glyphosate exposure to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), a cancer of the lymphatic system. In February 2026, manufacturer Bayer AG — which acquired Roundup’s creator, Monsanto, in 2018 — proposed a $7.25 billion nationwide settlement to resolve current and future claims. This page explains what happened, who was affected, and where things stand today.

How Roundup Causes Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, is a broad-spectrum herbicide developed by Monsanto in the 1970s and introduced commercially in 1974. For decades, it was promoted as one of the safest pesticides ever developed — Monsanto’s own marketing materials once claimed it was safer than table salt.

That characterization began to unravel publicly in 2015, when the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) — the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization — classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A). The IARC based its conclusion on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals and limited but meaningful evidence in humans, particularly agricultural workers with repeated, long-term exposure.

The IARC classification set off a wave of scientific scrutiny. Multiple epidemiological studies published in peer-reviewed journals found statistically significant elevated rates of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma among people with regular glyphosate exposure. Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is a cancer that originates in the lymphatic system — the network of vessels and nodes that forms a critical part of the immune system. It encompasses more than 60 distinct subtypes, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has maintained that glyphosate is “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans” when used as directed — a position that has become the centerpiece of Bayer’s defense and the subject of a pending U.S. Supreme Court case on whether EPA label approval preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims.

Juries, however, have sided with plaintiffs. Three bellwether trials before Bayer began settling resulted in landmark verdicts — evidence that the science was persuasive enough to move ordinary people who evaluated both sides of the evidence.

Roundup Lawsuit Verdicts and the 2026 Bayer Settlement

The Roundup litigation produced some of the largest personal injury verdicts in recent American legal history. Among the most significant outcomes:

• A $611 million verdict in Missouri, affirmed by the state appellate court in May 2025
• A $28 million verdict in California, upheld on appeal in November 2025
• Multiple additional eight- and nine-figure verdicts across different state and federal courts

The pattern of jury losses accelerated Bayer’s move toward a global resolution. In February 2026, Bayer proposed a $7.25 billion nationwide class settlement to resolve both existing and future Roundup non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma claims. A Missouri state court judge granted preliminary approval of the settlement on March 4, 2026.

Individual awards under the proposed settlement vary based upon factors such as the severity of the claimant’s illness, degree of exposure, and other individual circumstances. Payments would be distributed over a period of up to 21 years.

The Supreme Court Preemption Case

A separate but critically important development is playing out at the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court heard oral argument in late April 2026 on whether EPA approval of Roundup’s labeling shields Bayer from state-court failure-to-warn claims under a legal doctrine called federal preemption. If the Court sides with Bayer, it could significantly limit or extinguish future state-law claims based on inadequate warnings — even for claimants not covered by the proposed class settlement. A decision is expected before the Court’s term ends in June 2026.

Who Was Affected by Roundup Exposure

Not everyone who used Roundup developed cancer — but certain groups had significantly higher and more prolonged exposure, and it is among these populations that the research has found the clearest cancer signal. Individuals who may have been at elevated risk include:

• Farmers and agricultural workers who applied Roundup or other glyphosate-based herbicides regularly over extended periods
• Landscapers and groundskeepers who used Roundup professionally on lawns, parks, golf courses, and public spaces
• Home users who applied Roundup regularly over many years in residential settings
• Family members of individuals who died from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma following Roundup exposure, who may have their own wrongful death claims

The relevant cancer diagnoses associated with Roundup exposure claims include non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and its subtypes. Specific subtypes that have appeared in litigation include diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The strength of any individual claim generally depends on the duration and frequency of exposure, the method of application (spraying without protective equipment carries higher exposure), and the timing of the cancer diagnosis relative to the period of use.

Where the Roundup Litigation Stands Today

As of May 2026, the Roundup litigation is in a transitional phase. The $7.25 billion class settlement proposed by Bayer has received preliminary approval and is moving toward a final approval hearing. At the same time, the U.S. Supreme Court’s preemption decision — expected by June 2026 — could significantly affect the rights of claimants not captured by the class settlement and shape the future of Roundup litigation more broadly.

Bayer has maintained throughout the litigation that glyphosate is safe and that its product warnings complied with EPA-approved labeling. The company has nonetheless faced sustained jury losses and has chosen a settlement path as a business resolution — without admitting liability.

For individuals who have already filed claims, the path forward depends on whether they are part of the proposed class, the specifics of their diagnosis and exposure history, and how the Supreme Court ruling affects their legal theory. Anyone in this situation should be in contact with the attorney who filed their claim for updates specific to their case.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Roundup Cancer Lawsuit

About Carey & Danis LLC

Carey & Danis LLC is a plaintiff-side litigation firm based in St. Louis, Missouri, with a national practice in mass tort and class action cases. The firm has represented thousands of clients in pharmaceutical, medical device, and toxic exposure litigation, as well as consumer protection and data breach class actions. Carey & Danis LLC was actively involved in the Roundup litigation and has a track record of pursuing complex cases against large corporate defendants on behalf of injured individuals and families.

For information about our firm and active cases we are currently investigating, visit National Case Alert or careydanis.com.