Roundup weed killer lawsuits continue to rank among the most significant and financially consequential product-liability litigations in U.S. history. What began as a small number of individual cancer claims has expanded into a nationwide mass tort alleging that Monsanto—now owned by Bayer—failed to adequately warn consumers about the potential cancer risks linked to long-term exposure to Roundup. Although Bayer has already paid billions of dollars to resolve tens of thousands of Roundup claims, the litigation is far from over. Tens of thousands of lawsuits remain pending in both state and federal courts, and new cases continue to be filed each month as additional victims are diagnosed with cancer years after prolonged Roundup use.
This 2025 Roundup lawsuit update provides a clear, up-to-date overview of the current status of the litigation and what to expect moving forward. Below, we review recent settlement activity, significant jury verdicts, and key court trends that are shaping the future of Roundup lawsuits. We also explain what these developments mean for victims and their families, including whether there may still be time to file a claim and what potential compensation could look like as the Roundup litigation continues to unfold.
Quick Snapshot: Roundup Litigation in 2025
As of 2025, the scope of the Roundup litigation remains enormous despite years of courtroom battles and settlement negotiations. Bayer has already resolved nearly 100,000 Roundup lawsuits, paying more than $11 billion to plaintiffs who allege that long-term exposure to the weed killer caused serious health conditions. Even with these large-scale settlements, the litigation is far from complete. Approximately 61,000 Roundup lawsuits remain active nationwide, with cases pending in both state and federal courts. More than 4,500 of these cases remain consolidated in the federal multidistrict litigation, while the majority of new lawsuits are now being filed in state courts.
The primary injury alleged in these cases is non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a form of blood cancer that many plaintiffs were diagnosed with years after prolonged exposure to Roundup. Despite the time that has passed and the billions already paid, the Roundup crisis remains unresolved, with significant legal and financial pressure continuing to mount.
How We Got Here
Despite the time that has passed and the billions of dollars already paid, the Roundup crisis remains unresolved, with significant legal and financial pressure continuing to mount for Bayer.
Despite the time that has passed and the billions of dollars already paid in settlements, the Roundup litigation remains unresolved, with mounting legal and financial pressure continuing to weigh heavily on Bayer.
In 2018, Bayer acquired Monsanto—along with full responsibility for what would become one of the largest and most costly mass tort litigations in U.S. history.
Current Status of the Roundup MDL
All federal Roundup lawsuits were consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Northern District of California to centralize discovery, coordinate pretrial proceedings, and address complex expert testimony and evidentiary issues in a consistent manner. At its peak, the MDL encompassed more than 100,000 individual claims filed by plaintiffs nationwide, alleging that long-term exposure to Roundup caused non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other serious health conditions. For several years, the MDL functioned as the central battleground for Roundup litigation, generating critical bellwether trials, key expert-witness rulings, and appellate decisions that helped shape the trajectory of Roundup cases nationwide.
As of 2025, however, the role of the Roundup MDL has diminished significantly. The federal docket is steadily shrinking, with relatively few new lawsuits now being filed in federal court. As of 2025, the role of the Roundup MDL has diminished significantly. The number of cases pending in the federal proceeding continues to decline, with relatively few new lawsuits being filed in federal court. Instead, the majority of new Roundup claims are now being filed in state courts nationwide. This shift is largely driven by plaintiffs’ strategic preference for state venues, where juries have delivered more favorable outcomes and courts have generally imposed fewer restrictions on expert testimony.
As of 2025, however, the role of the Roundup MDL has diminished significantly. The number of cases pending in the federal proceeding continues to decline, with relatively few new lawsuits now being filed in federal court.
Recent Jury Verdicts Are Crushing Bayer
One of the most striking trends in the Roundup litigation throughout 2024 and 2025 is the continued willingness of juries to punish Bayer with massive verdicts. Despite years of defense victories, appeals, and settlement efforts, recent trials show that jurors remain deeply skeptical of Bayer’s safety arguments and are still responding strongly to evidence presented by plaintiffs. Time and again, juries have concluded that Roundup exposure caused cancer and that the company failed to adequately warn consumers about those risks.
Several recent verdicts underscore the severity of this trend. In 2025, a Georgia jury returned a staggering $2.1 billion verdict, one of the largest product-liability awards in U.S. history. Around the same time, a Missouri appellate court affirmed a $611 million verdict, reinforcing the durability of large punitive awards against Bayer. Pennsylvania courts have upheld verdicts as high as $175 million, while California juries have continued to deliver significant awards, including a $332 million verdict. Together, these outcomes demonstrate that large jury awards are not isolated incidents but part of a sustained pattern.
A common thread running through these verdicts is the presence of substantial punitive damages. Jurors have repeatedly cited internal Monsanto documents, evidence of ghostwritten scientific studies, and testimony suggesting that the company prioritized profits over public safety. The failure to warn consumers about potential cancer risks has proven especially damaging in the courtroom, fueling juror anger and leading to punishment-focused awards designed to hold Bayer accountable. As long as these verdicts continue, they will remain one of the strongest forces driving settlement pressure and shaping the future of the Roundup litigation.
Roundup Settlements: What Has Been Paid So Far
Over the past several years, Bayer has paid billions of dollars to resolve a substantial portion of the Roundup litigation, confirming that nearly 100,000 claims have already been settled nationwide. According to company disclosures, Bayer has spent more than $11 billion compensating plaintiffs who alleged that long-term exposure to Roundup caused non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other serious health conditions. In 2025 alone, Bayer added an additional $1.37 billion to its litigation reserves, signaling that settlement activity is ongoing and that the company expects to continue resolving cases rather than taking them all to trial.
Most of these settlements have not been announced publicly or resolved through a single, comprehensive agreement. Instead, Bayer has relied heavily on block settlement deals negotiated with law firms representing large groups of plaintiffs. These agreements allow thousands of cases to be resolved at once, often under confidential terms, which is why many settlements occur quietly without individual announcements or court rulings. Importantly, despite the large sums already paid, there is still no global settlement in place covering the tens of thousands of Roundup lawsuits that remain pending. As a result, litigation continues in courts across the country, with future settlements likely to be influenced by ongoing jury verdicts, appellate decisions, and mounting financial pressure on Bayer.
How Roundup Settlement Amounts Are Calculated
Roundup settlements are not based on a flat or uniform payout. Instead, they rely on a detailed points-based system designed to evaluate the relative strength and value of each individual claim. Under this framework, cases are scored based on multiple factors tied to exposure, diagnosis, and overall harm, with higher-scoring cases qualifying for larger settlement amounts.
Key factors considered in this system include the type of cancer diagnosed—non-Hodgkin lymphoma cases generally receive the highest scores—the length and intensity of Roundup exposure, and the age of the plaintiff at diagnosis. Additional considerations include the extent of medical treatment required, the severity of the illness, long-term health outcomes, and, in some cases, the impact on the victim’s ability to work or earn income. Claims with higher point totals are placed into upper settlement tiers and receive larger payouts, while cases with lower scores or weaker evidence typically result in more modest compensation.
Is Bayer Considering Bankruptcy?
At least publicly, Bayer has raised the possibility of using bankruptcy as a tool to manage its remaining Roundup liabilities. Specifically, the company has floated the idea of placing Monsanto into Chapter 11 bankruptcy, a move that would force current and future Roundup claims into a court-supervised bankruptcy trust. Such a strategy could potentially cap Bayer’s exposure and limit jury trials going forward.
Many legal analysts, however, view this bankruptcy discussion in one of two ways. Some believe it is primarily a pressure tactic designed to push plaintiffs toward lower settlement values. Others see it as a genuine last-resort option if massive verdicts continue to accumulate faster than Bayer can settle cases. With Bayer’s market value now far below its potential Roundup liability, the financial pressure is undeniable, and bankruptcy—once unthinkable—has become part of the public conversation surrounding the future of the litigation.
Supreme Court Appeal: Bayer’s Last Big Hope
Bayer’s final and most ambitious legal strategy centers on the U.S. Supreme Court. The company is asking the Court to rule that federal law preempts state failure-to-warn claims involving Roundup. Specifically, Bayer argues that because the Environmental Protection Agency approved glyphosate product labels without cancer warnings, plaintiffs should be barred from bringing state-law claims alleging inadequate warnings.
Lower courts are divided on this issue, with some allowing Roundup claims to proceed and others siding with Bayer’s preemption argument. Even if the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, a final decision could take years, during which time Roundup lawsuits will continue to move forward in state courts. In the meantime, jury trials, verdicts, and settlement negotiations continue unabated, leaving Bayer exposed to ongoing legal and financial risk.
Why New Roundup Lawsuits Are Still Being Filed
New Roundup lawsuits continue to be filed largely because many victims are only now receiving cancer diagnoses years after their initial exposure to the product. Medical experts have long recognized that cancers such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma often have extended latency periods, meaning symptoms may not appear until many years after the underlying exposure occurred.
As a result, individuals who regularly used Roundup decades ago may only recently be learning that they are ill and potentially eligible to pursue legal action. This delayed onset explains why new claims continue to emerge even after years of litigation and settlements. Importantly, even if Roundup were removed from store shelves entirely today, legal experts expect new lawsuits to be filed for years to come as additional diagnoses surface and victims connect their illness to long-term Roundup exposure.
Is There Still Time to File a Roundup Lawsuit?
Possibly—but filing deadlines vary by state, and timing is critical. Many victims mistakenly believe they are no longer eligible to file a claim when, in fact, they may still have legal options available. In several states, the statute of limitations begins to run at the time of diagnosis rather than the last date of Roundup exposure.
If you or a loved one used Roundup regularly and were later diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or a related cancer, you may still qualify to pursue compensation. Speaking with an experienced Roundup attorney can help clarify eligibility and ensure important deadlines are not missed.
What Happens Next in the Roundup Litigation?
Looking ahead, several trends are likely to define the next phase of Roundup litigation. Bayer is expected to continue quietly settling cases while attempting to limit its overall exposure. At the same time, plaintiffs’ attorneys will push more cases toward trial, particularly in state courts where juries have shown a willingness to deliver substantial verdicts. Bankruptcy threats may intensify as financial pressure grows, and uncertainty surrounding potential Supreme Court involvement will continue to loom.
One thing is clear: despite years of litigation and billions already paid, the Roundup saga remains an unresolved legal and financial disaster, with no simple or immediate end in sight.
Final Thoughts
The Roundup litigation is no longer about scientific debate alone. It has become a broader reckoning over corporate conduct, jury accountability, and financial survival. For victims and their families, the opportunity to pursue justice may still exist—but that window will not remain open indefinitely.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information, not legal advice. If you have any questions about this, please don’t hesitate to contact us.
Muhammad Suleman Ahmad is a content writer covering lawsuits, legal explainers, and court-related topics for LawsuitDeck.com. His work is structured for clarity and general understanding.
