A Trump order protected a weedkiller. And also a Weapon of War

By Hiroko Tabuchu
Published March 8, 2026 on Seattle Times

When President Donald Trump issued an abrupt order last month compelling the production of glyphosate, the controversial weedkiller known as Roundup, he angered health activists who have long campaigned to ban the product for its links to cancer. 

But largely overshadowed in the furor was the order’s mention of something contentious in another way: the manufacture of munitions used by the United States military.

Bayer, which makes glyphosate, is also the only company in the United States that manufactures a form of elemental phosphorus called white phosphorus, which it uses to make the weedkiller. That white phosphorus is also used to make munitions deployed as smoke screens and incendiary devices that can violently burn property or people. 

Concerns about the availability of phosphorus for defense played a significant role in Trump’s move to deem Bayer’s operations a national security priority, according to two people with direct knowledge of the administration’s deliberations. One of the individuals also stressed its importance in light of recent U.S. military actions. 

When asked about the significance of munitions in the Trump executive order, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said in a phone call, “The president made this decision based on national security priorities.” She added that the administration is funding research into alternatives to the herbicide glyphosate. 

Bayer’s place in America’s military and industrial supply chain is a little-known aspect of a German company that’s behind household pharmaceuticals including aspirin and Alka-Seltzer. White phosphorus ignites spontaneously when it comes in contact with oxygen. It produces a thick white smoke and can reach temperatures high enough to burn through metal. 

Bayer, through its acquisition of Monsanto in 2018, operates the only facility in the United States that produces white phosphorus. It is in Soda Springs, Idaho, and uses phosphate rock the company mines locally.

Bayer uses most of that white phosphorus to make the glyphosate in Roundup, a powerful weedkiller that is a cornerstone of U.S. food production. Roundup has been the target of thousands of lawsuits for its alleged health harms, and the company has already spent billions of dollars on settlements. 

The company has pushed measures in Congress, as well as in state legislatures across the country, that would shield it from such lawsuits. Bayer has also petitioned the Supreme Court to weigh in on a case that could limit the company’s liability. The court is scheduled to hear arguments in that case in April. 

Bayer also supplies some white phosphorous, via intermediaries, to the U.S. military, which uses it to fill white phosphorus munitions at the Pine Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas.

Trump’s executive order declared elemental phosphorus crucial to “military readiness and national defense,” and ordered measures to ensure a continued supply. It’s a key component, the order said, in smoke, illumination and incendiary devices, as well as a critical component in semiconductors used in defense technologies. 

Bayer’s role as the sole U.S. maker of white phosphorus gives the German pharmaceuticals and agrochemicals giant a position of leverage in both the agriculture and defense industries. It also carries reputational risks for Bayer, associating the company with a widely criticized herbicide as well as with the U.S. military at a time when the president has put the country on a war footing. 

Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a foreign policy think tank said white phosphorus munitions were typically used in ground operations and by special forces, not in airstrikes of the kind the United States is pursuing in Iran. 

But if, for example, the administration were to take action against drug cartels in Latin America or to launch a ground operation in Cuba, forces might be expected to use “these types of white phosphorus munitions to disguise their movements,” said Kavanaugh, formerly the director of the army strategy program at the Rand Corp. 

Using it isn’t illegal, though deploying it deliberately against civilians or in a civilian setting violates the laws of war.

Some environmental groups said the president’s focus on military applications is detracting attention from the health concerns linked to a weedkiller. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer has deemed glyphosate “probably carcinogenic to humans.” 

Bayer’s lobbying efforts 

Bayer spent more than $9 million last year to pay 53 lobbyists registered to represent the company’s interests with the White House and various federal agencies as well as in Congress, according to OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan group that tracks lobbying and campaign finance data. 

Some of the Bayer lobbyists have close ties to the Trump campaign and administration. Among them is Brian Ballard, who raised more than $50 million for Trump’s 2024 campaign, according to Federal Election Commission filings, and whose former partners include White House chief of staff Susie Wiles and the attorney general, Pam Bondi. 

In June, Bill Anderson, Bayer’s CEO, met with Lee Zeldin, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, to request an update on glyphosate as well as the Supreme Court case, according to internal emails obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity through a public records request. 

“We’re getting a much clearer picture of the unfettered access one of most powerful pesticide corporations in the world has to top officials,” said Nathan Donley, environmental health director at the center, which sued the administration over glyphosate. 

Brian Leake, a spokesperson for Bayer, said the company “meets with agencies as a normal part of the regulatory process” and that the company has been “transparent about our position on these topics and very public about the issues we face as a company.” 

Leavitt said that “to suggest the administration has succumbed to lobbying efforts in the decision-making process, on this issue or any issue for that matter, is completely false.”

The administration’s actions on glyphosate have been deeply unpopular among parts of Trump’s political base, including some supporters of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” agenda. The corps of health conscious and mostly female voters had embraced Trump for his pledge to address Americans’ concerns about “toxins in our environments and pesticides in our food.” 

There has also been criticism of the company’s lobbying efforts from within the Republican Party. Speaking on the House floor on Feb. 20, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., criticized Bayer’s lobbying drive, saying, “All three branches of this government are under siege by lobbyists and lawyers from a German company named Bayer.” 

Uses of ‘Willy Pete’ 

White phosphorus, sometimes known by the nickname Willy Pete, can be used as a smoke screen to mask troop movements or to mark targets. But it can severely burn people who come into contact with it.

In 2023 the Biden administration said it was looking into reports by Amnesty International and in The Washington Post that Israel had used white phosphorus supplied by the United States in Lebanon, in violation of international law. Israel has denied it used white phosphorus illegally. 

“It has horrible humanitarian consequences,” said Bonnie Docherty, a senior adviser at Human Rights Watch and director of the Armed Conflict and Civilian Protection Initiative at Harvard Law School. “It causes really deep burns. It’s notorious because it burns when exposed to oxygen, and wounds often reignite when bandages are removed,” she said. 

The concern within the Trump administration is that if Bayer’s glyphosate business doesn’t receive protections, the United States could lose both its sole domestic supplier of the weedkiller, as well as its sole domestic source of white phosphorus for defense and other applications. Bayer executives have said publicly that the company could stop selling Roundup altogether because of the billions of dollars that the company has paid out toward its Roundup litigation. 

“Right now, there’s a single point of failure in Soda Springs,” said Matt Scholz, a senior project manager at the Sustainable Phosphorus Alliance and a research professor at Arizona State University, referring to the site in Idaho where the Bayer subsidiary makes white phosphorus. “It does give pause that there’s a lack of redundancy for something that’s so essential.” 

In recent weeks the administration has enacted a string of policies favorable to Bayer. In October, the federal government approved Bayer’s bid to open a new phosphate mine in Idaho. Then late last year, the Trump administration backed Bayer in the Supreme Court case, which could block many of the Roundup lawsuits. 

On Feb. 17, Bayer moved to end the bulk of its current Roundup litigation, proposing a $7.25 billion class-action settlement. The next day, Trump issued his executive order in support of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate.

“It’s been an exceptionally good few weeks for Bayer,” said Nora Freeman Engstrom, a professor at Stanford Law School who has studied Bayer’s litigation and lobbying strategy.

Last week, the Trump administration filed a brief with the Supreme Court saying it formally backed Bayer in its case before the court. That legal brief referred only to food security concerns.

Read the original article on Seattle Times »

New Documents: Trump EPA Administrator Met With Pesticide CEO During Push to Shield Company From Lawsuits

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin and other top officials met with Bayer’s CEO to discuss “legal/judicial issues” months before the Justice Department weighed in at the Supreme Court on the chemical company’s behalf, according to a memo and visitor logs obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity.

In December the Trump Justice Department supported Bayer’s request to the Supreme Court to consider its appeal in Monsanto v. Durnell for a shield against liability for the health harms linked to pesticides. In January the Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal.

The memo and proposed agenda for a June 17, 2025 meeting said Bayer’s CEO also planned to thank the EPA for “its work on MAHA” and “updating the glyphosate web page,” in apparent reference to the agency withdrawing its previous support for California’s cancer warning on glyphosate labels.

“These documents show the unfettered access one of most powerful pesticide corporations in the world has to EPA’s top officials and it raises serious questions about just how far Trump’s political operatives within the EPA and the DOJ were willing to go to bat for Bayer,” said Nathan Donley, the Center’s environmental health science director. “It’s disgusting that the EPA administrator is so accessible to the pesticide industry. He almost certainly wouldn’t give the time of day to the thousands of Americans suffering from cancers linked to glyphosate and other EPA-approved pesticides.”

According to the memo, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, at the June meeting Bayer CEO Bill Anderson, EPA Administrator Zeldin, Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator of the chemicals office Nancy Beck, and General Counsel for the EPA Sean Donahue were set to discuss “legal/judicial issues” involving the Supreme Court. The proposed meeting agenda covered:

• “Supreme Court Action: Bayer will give an update to the Administrator on where they stand in litigation and labeling options”
• “Thanks: Bayer will provide a small thanks for updating the glyphosate web page and work on MAHA.”

The “glyphosate web page” update is likely a reference to the EPA’s decision in May 2025 to withdraw its 2022 letter stating that California was authorized to require language on pesticide labels for products containing glyphosate warning of cancer risk so long as the label also stated that the EPA did not agree with that conclusion.

An internet archive search revealed that the only change to the EPA’s glyphosate webpage during that time period was the letter withdrawal, and metadata from the withdrawal letter indicated it was updated on May 9, 2025 by staff that work under Beck at the EPA chemicals office.

Withdrawing that letter likely played a part in the Department of Justice’s decision to reverse its 2022 position that states can add warning labels on pesticides beyond what the EPA requires under federal law. The letter withdrawal was specifically cited in the Solicitor General’s brief arguing for the Supreme Court to consider Bayer’s case.

The following timeline indicates the June 17 meeting at EPA headquarters came at an important juncture leading up to the Supreme Court’s January decision to hear the glyphosate case:

• April 4, 2025: Bayer seeks Supreme Court review for glyphosate case.
• May 9, 2025: EPA updates glyphosate webpage to include link to withdrawn letter to state of California.
• June 17, 2025: Bayer meets with top EPA officials regarding legal/judicial issues; thanks EPA for updating webpage.
• June 30, 2025: Supreme Court asks the Trump solicitor general for its position on glyphosate case.
• December 1, 2025: Citing the EPA’s letter withdrawing its previous support for California’s right to add pesticide warnings, the solicitor general files a brief with the Supreme Court, reversing course and supporting Bayer’s position that federal law preempts states from adding warnings on pesticide labels beyond those established by the EPA.
• March 2 2026: The solicitor general files another brief with the Supreme Court that further supports Bayer’s position. This brief was specifically supported by Sean Donahue, as evidenced by his name appearing on the brief along with members of the Office of the Solicitor General.

“The Department of Justice has completely trashed its proud tradition of independence and apolitical pursuit of justice,” said Donley. “It’s a very sad day in America when our own DOJ is actively working to deny Americans their day in court.”

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.8 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

Read the original article on The Center for Biological Diversity »

Can Taking Melatonin Counter the Effects of Glyphosate in Your Food?

By Mira Miller
Published March 22, 2026 on Very Well Health

After a recent report found that even organic bread may contain some glyphosate—a widely used herbicide that may be harmful to human health—many people have been looking for ways to reduce glyphosate exposure. Online, some have suggested that melatonin supplements may be able to counter the effects, but the claim is based on limited research.

What Studies Say About Melatonin & Glyphosate 

Currently, only early laboratory studies have explored whether melatonin can counter the effects of glyphosate, including one study from earlier this year which found that melatonin can alleviate glyphosate-induced harm in honeybees by shielding the bee’s digestive system and restoring internal balance.¹

Another study from 2022 found that exposure to glyphosate and hard water at both high doses and environmentally relevant doses causes renal dysfunction in mice, and this dysfunction can be attenuated by melatonin.² While the authors said their results support the notion that melatonin may have therapeutic potential for the treatment of chronic kidney diseases, more research is needed.

A 2024 study meanwhile found that melatonin markedly improved glyphosate-induced liver injury in a rooster model with primary chicken embryo hepatocytes.³ Another study in 2016 found that melatonin exerted a potent gene-protective effect against the toxicity of glyphosate on human blood lymphocytes.⁴

While the existing data may seem promising, experts say we have a long way to go before science can prove that melatonin might actually work to counter the effects of glyphosate in humans.

"There’s currently no strong human evidence that melatonin can counteract exposure to glyphosate," said Reshma Kapadia Patel, PharmD, a de-prescribing pharmacist and the founder of WiseMedRx. "The idea likely comes from early laboratory studies showing antioxidant effects, but that’s very different from proving it works as a treatment in people."

How Concerned Should You Be About Glyphosate? 

It's important to note that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established a safe tolerance for ingestion of glyphosate.

This includes "a wide range of human and animal food crops, including corn, soybean, oil seeds, grains, and some fruits and vegetables, ranging from 0.1 to 400 parts per million (ppm)," said Samantha M. Coogan, MS, RDN, director of the didactic program in dietetics and senior lecturer at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

However, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has labeled glyphosate as "possibly carcinogenic," reflecting a lack of consensus on whether the herbicide is ultimately harmful to human health when used according to label instructions.

Per the EPA's tolerance threshold guidelines, Coogan said most humans should be safe if they stay within the EPA's threshold range of 0.1 to 400 parts per million (ppm). But if someone was truly that afraid of ingestion, she said avoidance or buying organic would be the only real options.

"But it's also important to note that organic produce still has a smaller degree of pesticide residue," Coogan noted.

Melatonin Isn’t a Proven Fix for Glyphosate Exposure 

While complete avoidance might be difficult, melatonin isn't necessarily the answer.

Read the original article on Very Well Health »

Read more from the "In the Weeds" Series »