Special Action—Failure to Warn: Veto North Dakota Bill Protecting Pesticide Companies, instead of Residents! [Inactive]

Help stop legislation in North Dakota (HB 1318) that will shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. Beyond Pesticides is a national, grassroots organization that represents community-based organizations and a range of people seeking to improve protections from pesticides and promote alternative pest management strategies that reduce or eliminate reliance on toxic pesticides.

The bill passed the House on January 24 and was received by the Senate on January 27. HB 1318 was referred to the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on February 13, with a public hearing scheduled for March 6, however it was canceled with little notice. HB 1318 passed out of the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on April 10 [4-2] as amended here. HB 1318 was voted out by the Senate on Monday, April 14 [28-18]. The amended bill will go back to the House as soon as April 15. Update—HB 1318 was unfortunately signed into law by Governor Kelly on April 24, 2025, marking North Dakota as the first state to impose legal immunity from failure-to-warn lawsuits. 

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow to consumer safety for all toxic products. In a climate with less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect our health and the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at National Agriculture Law Center. Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff's injury,” says Ms. Rollins.

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominantly German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year when bills were introduced in Missouri, Iowa, and Idaho. We mobilized last year with little warning, and we were able to defeat these bills. Currently, bills have been introduced in eleven states and defeated in seven. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not people. 

>> Please ask the governor to VETO HB 1318 by clicking here.

Thank you for your active participation and engagement! The Action is a multi-step process, so please click submit to proceed to step two, where you will be able to personalize comments before final submission. The comment maximum limit is 4,000 characters, so it may be necessary to delete some of our prepared message text if editing.

For more information, see our Myths & Facts and North Dakota resource page, as well as the Failure-to-Warn and Pesticide Immunity Bills resource hub.

Letter to Governor Kemp [Original Text from April 17, 2025]

I am writing to urge you to VETO HB 1318, “A BILL for an Act to create and enact as new section to chapter 28-01.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to pesticide labeling." This would effectively shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. The chemical companies have argued unsuccessfully all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that they should not be required to warn consumers about the dangers of their products. So now they are asking North Dakotans to do what they have not been able to do in the courts—prevent us, your constituents, from taking action when harmed by their harmful products!

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow to consumer and farmer safety in North Dakota. In a climate with less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect those who use potentially hazardous materials, public safety, and the health of the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at National Agriculture Law Center. Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff’s injury,” says Ms. Rollins. For more information, see the Myths & Facts sheet (bp-dc.org/failure-to-warn-myths-and-facts-sheet) and North Dakota state resource page. (https://www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/failure-to-warn/bills-to-track/plains-target-states)

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominately German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year to at least eleven states. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not your constituents.

Please VETO HB 1318 for us and protect those in North Dakota by ensuring that those harmed by toxic products are compensated!

Thank you!

Letter to the North Dakota House: [Original text from April 14, 2025]

I am writing to ask you to oppose HB 1318, “A BILL for an Act to create and enact as new section to chapter 28-01.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to pesticide labeling,” that will shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. The chemical companies have argued unsuccessfully all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that they should not be required to warn consumers about the dangers of their products. So now they are asking the North Dakota legislature to do what they have not been able to do in the courts—prevent people harmed by toxic products from suing them.

HB 1318 was referred to the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on February 13, with a public hearing scheduled for March 6, however it was canceled with little notice. HB 1318 passed out of the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on April 10 [4-2] as amended. HB 1318 was voted out by the Senate on Monday, April 14 [28-18]. The amended bill will go back to the House as soon as April 15. Stay tuned for further developments!

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow for consumer and farmer safety for all toxic products. In a climate with less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect those who use potentially hazardous materials, public safety, and the health of the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at National Agriculture Law Center (https://nationalaglawcenter.org/states-introduce-pesticide-liability-limitation-bills-in-2025-legislative-session/). Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff’s injury,” says Ms. Rollins. For more information, see the Myths & Facts sheet (https://bp-dc.org/failure-to-warn-myths-and-facts-sheet) and North Dakota state resource page. (https://www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/failure-to-warn/bills-to-track/plains-target-states)

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominantly German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year to at least seven states. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not people.

Please oppose HB 1318 and ensure that those who are harmed by toxic products are compensated.

Thank you!

Letter to the North Dakota Senate: [Original text from March 21, 2025]

I am writing to ask you to oppose HB 1318, “A BILL for an Act to create and enact as new section to chapter 28-01.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to pesticide labeling,” that will shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. The chemical companies have argued unsuccessfully all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that they should not be required to warn consumers about the dangers of their products. So now they are asking the North Dakota legislature to do what they have not been able to do in the courts—prevent people harmed by toxic products from suing them.

HB 1318 passed the House on January 24 and was received by the Senate on January 27. It was then referred to the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on February 13, with a public hearing scheduled on Friday, March 14 at 8:30 am CST in the Senate Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Committee. The Committee met on March 21, but held off from voting until the week of March 24-28. 

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow for consumer and farmer safety for all toxic products. In a climate with less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect those who use potentially hazardous materials, public safety, and the health of the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at National Agriculture Law Center (https://nationalaglawcenter.org/states-introduce-pesticide-liability-limitation-bills-in-2025-legislative-session/). Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff’s injury,” says Ms. Rollins. For more information, see the Myths & Facts sheet (https://bp-dc.org/failure-to-warn-myths-and-facts-sheet) and North Dakota state resource page. (https://www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/failure-to-warn/bills-to-track/plains-target-states)

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominantly German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year to at least seven states. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not people.

Please oppose HB 1318 and ensure that those who are harmed by toxic products are compensated.

Thank you!

Letter to the North Dakota Senate: [Original text from March 10, 2025]

I am writing to ask you to oppose HB 1318, “A BILL for an Act to create and enact as new section to chapter 28-01.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to pesticide labeling,” that will shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. The chemical companies have argued unsuccessfully all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that they should not be required to warn consumers about the dangers of their products. So now they are asking the North Dakota legislature to do what they have not been able to do in the courts—prevent people harmed by toxic products from suing them.

HB 1318 was referred to the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on February 13, with a public hearing scheduled on Friday, March 14 at 8:30am CST in the Senate Agriculture Committee.

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow for consumer and farmer safety for all toxic products. In a climate with less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect those who use potentially hazardous materials, public safety, and the health of the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at National Agriculture Law Center (https://nationalaglawcenter.org/states-introduce-pesticide-liability-limitation-bills-in-2025-legislative-session/). Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff’s injury,” says Ms. Rollins. For more information, see the Myths & Facts sheet (https://bp-dc.org/failure-to-warn-myths-and-facts-sheet) and North Dakota state resource page. (https://www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/failure-to-warn/bills-to-track/plains-target-states)

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominantly German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year to at least seven states. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not people.

Please oppose HB 1318 and ensure that those who are harmed by toxic products are compensated.

Thank you!

Letter to the North Dakota Senate: [Original text from March 4, 2025]

I am writing to ask you to oppose HB 1318, “A BILL for an Act to create and enact as new section to chapter 28-01.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to pesticide labeling,” that will shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. The chemical companies have argued unsuccessfully all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that they should not be required to warn consumers about the dangers of their products. So now they are asking the North Dakota legislature to do what they have not been able to do in the courts—prevent people harmed by toxic products from suing them.

HB 1318 was referred to the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on February 13, with a public hearing scheduled for Thursday, March 6, at 10 am CST.

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow for consumer and farmer safety for all toxic products. In a climate with less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect those who use potentially hazardous materials, public safety, and the health of the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at National Agriculture Law Center (https://nationalaglawcenter.org/states-introduce-pesticide-liability-limitation-bills-in-2025-legislative-session/). Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff’s injury,” says Ms. Rollins. For more information, see the Myths & Facts sheet (https://bp-dc.org/failure-to-warn-myths-and-facts-sheet) and North Dakota state resource page. (https://www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/failure-to-warn/bills-to-track/plains-target-states)

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominantly German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year to at least seven states. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not people.

Please oppose HB 1318 and ensure that those who are harmed by toxic products are compensated.

Thank you!

Action Alert to state Representatives and Senators [Original text from February 3, 2025]

Dear Friend,

We are writing to ask you to help stop legislation in North Dakota (HB 1318) that will shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. Beyond Pesticides is a national, grassroots organization that represents community-based organizations and a range of people seeking to improve protections from pesticides and promote alternative pest management strategies that reduce or eliminate reliance on toxic pesticides.

Status: The bill passed the House on January 24 and was received by the Senate on January 27. HB 1318 was referred to the Senate Agriculture and Veteran Affairs Committee on February 13, with a public hearing scheduled on Friday, March 14 at 8:30am CST in the Senate Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Committee.

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow to consumer safety for all toxic products. In a climate with less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect our health and the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at the National Agriculture Law Center. Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff's injury,” says Ms. Rollins.

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominantly German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year when bills were introduced in Missouri, Iowa, and Idaho. We mobilized last year with little warning, and we were able to defeat these bills. Currently, bills have been introduced in seven states. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not people. 

>> Please ask your state Senator to OPPOSE HB 1318 by clicking here.

Thank you!

The Targets for this Action are Representatives and Senators in the state legislature of North Dakota.

Thank you for your active participation and engagement! The Action is a multi-step process, so please click submit below to proceed to step two, where you will be able to personalize comments before final submission. The comment maximum limit is 4,000 characters, so it may be necessary to delete some of our prepared message text if editing.

For more information, please see our Myths & Facts and North Dakota resource page, as well as the Failure-to-Warn and Pesticide Immunity Bills resource hub.

Letter to the North Dakota House: [Original text from February 3, 2025]

I am writing to ask you to oppose HB 1318, “A BILL for an Act to create and enact as new section to chapter 28-01.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to pesticide labeling,” that will shield pesticide manufacturers from being sued by people who have been harmed by their products. The chemical companies have argued unsuccessfully all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that they should not be required to warn consumers about the dangers of their products. So now they are asking the North Dakota legislature to do what they have not been able to do in the courts—prevent people harmed by toxic products from suing them.

As you may know, HB 1318 just passed the North Dakota House of Representatives on January 24 and was received by the Senate on January 27. 

If this bill were to pass, it would strike a blow for consumer and farmer safety for all toxic products. In a climate where there is less regulation, the ability to sue creates an incentive for manufacturers to develop safer products that protect those who use potentially hazardous materials, public safety, and the health of the environment—not to mention the compensation it provides to those harmed.

Failure-to-warn claims serve as the basis for the overwhelming majority of pesticide injury litigation of the past decade, according to legal professionals, including Brigit Rollins, JD, staff attorney at National Agriculture Law Center (https://nationalaglawcenter.org/states-introduce-pesticide-liability-limitation-bills-in-2025-legislative-session/). Failure-to-warn is a legal argument grounded in the common law of state court systems across the nation. “Almost every pesticide injury lawsuit filed in the past ten years has included a claim that the pesticide manufacturer failed to warn the plaintiff of the health risks associated with using their product and that such failure caused the plaintiff’s injury,” says Ms. Rollins. For more information, see Myths & Facts. (https://bp-dc.org/failure-to-warn-myths-and-facts-sheet).

Petrochemical-based pesticide manufacturers, predominantly German-owned Bayer-Monsanto, are expanding their all-out push from last year to at least seven states. The focus of these bills is to protect chemical corporations, not people.

Please oppose HB 1318 and ensure that those who are harmed by toxic products are compensated.

Thank you!