What has Happened to Justice in American Courts?

Our court system is out of control. I was watching a Mariner’s game the other day when the network filled a break in the action with a half dozen commercials. My drink and chip bowl were both full, so I sat back in my recliner and day-dreamed. I came fully awake when a law firm announced they had won a $289 million settlement against the makers of Roundup and requested I call the number on the screen to see if I could share in the bounty. I have used Roundup in my garden for several years, so, after the ball game, I retired to my computer to read my email and do a Google search of “Roundup/lawsuit”. I found my email blocked by a pop-up ad from another law firm offering to include me in their class action suit against Roundup, and my Google search was hampered by three pages of additional ads offering to include me in their lawsuits. It is amazing how many lawyers are attracted by a few hundred million dollars. After working around the solicitors, I finally got to some real information.

The ads have been successful in attracting over 13,000 “victims”, but fail to mention the $289 million settlement was reduced to $78 million on appeal. That is still a shocking number, but the real shocker is a more recent case which netted over two billion dollars for a couple who used Roundup in their yard. I decided to dig deeper to determine what heinous disregard for public welfare generated such an unbelievable settlement. I found that the jury’s conclusions were contrary to scientific evidence, and the amount of the judgment was based solely on the defendants ability to pay.

Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, has been evaluated and approved by world wide health watchdog organizations for over forty years. In 2015 during a periodic review, the World Health Organization reported glyphosate to be, “probably carcinogenic”. This report became the basis for all litigation, even though the same report went on to contradict itself by declaring it was, “unlikely to cause cancer”. In a 2016 report, the EPA reported it “safe for human health and the environment”. In 2017, the European Commission, the European Chemicals Agency, and the European Food Safety Authority all deemed it safe. In 2018, the US Food and Drug Administration said, “Roundup has low toxicity for people”. In 2019 the EPA rebutted the World Health Organization report and stated unequivocally that Roundup was not a carcinogen. Juries don’t have to agree with scientific evidence.

There is no doubt the California groundskeeper and the couple who used Roundup on their yard suffer from a painful cancer that will most probably shorten their lives. I can not imagine being in the position to place a monetary value on human lifespan. A $289 million judgment, however, is way out of line when compared to other cases. A list of the top twenty 2017 wrongful death settlements in California revealed none over $40 million and only three over $10 million. A settlement of $1.5 million made the top twenty. It would appear that monetary damages awarded are based on the defendants ability to pay. I find something wrong with that logic. Why should defendants be penalized for being successful?

As I read the ads surrounding the Roundup litigation, I get the impression that the process is some sort of a game. A game between lawyers to see how they can manipulate the system, and justice gets trampled in the process. Our tort system is out of control and needs nation wide reform. We need a set of guidelines for rewarding damages and a review process to ensure juries base their findings on the evidence presented rather that the debating skills of lawyers. Punitive damages should be the purview of the criminal courts. Judgments in civil courts should be based solely on the damages suffered by the plaintiff regardless of the defendants bank balance. We need a system of justice rather than a contest of legal skills.

(Frank Watson is a retired Air Force Colonel and a long time resident of Eastern Washington. He has been a freelance columnist for more than 19 years.)