2026-04-27T10:00:51.197Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
作者：萨拉·奥默莫勒
发布时间：2026年4月27日，美国东部时间早上6:00
约什·埃德尔森/法新社/盖蒂图片社
当包括美国卫生局局长提名人凯西·米恩斯在内的一群母亲和健康影响博主受邀本月前往白宫时，她们中的一些人以为只会有几名工作人员听取她们对除草剂健康风险的不满。
但据出席会议的“让美国再次健康”（MAHA）博主亚历克斯·克拉克透露，这场会议最终在一个“座无虚席”的房间里持续了两小时，美国卫生与公众服务部部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪、白宫办公厅主任苏西·怀尔斯，就连总统本人也到场旁听。
“他们让我们畅所欲言——让我们把心里的话都说了出来，”克拉克说道，她主持着由转折点美国出品的MAHA主题播客《文化药剂师》。
克拉克和在场的“MAHA妈妈”们有太多诉求需要表达。她们首要关注的是常用除草剂草甘膦，呼吁减少其使用并调查其安全性。
周一，美国最高法院将开庭审理一起案件，这可能会敲定一场旷日持久的争议：美国最常用的除草剂之一是否安全。这一问题被视为检验“让美国再次健康”运动在华盛顿实际影响力的试金石。
这起针对孟山都（草甘膦产品“农达”的生产商，现已被拜耳收购）的诉讼，将决定民众能否继续以产品引发疾病为由起诉该公司。
但无论这起预计6月作出判决的案件结果如何，限制杀虫剂使用的议题早已让MAHA的支持者群体群情激昂。
预计将有数百名抗议者在庭审前聚集在最高法院外，届时将有30多位发言者号召集会者推动加强杀虫剂保护措施。
这起备受关注的案件的来龙去脉
德韦恩·“李”·约翰逊是旧金山一所学校的场地管理员，2014年他被诊断出患有晚期非霍奇金淋巴瘤时年仅42岁。多年来，他一直在负责维护的校园场地喷洒除草剂农达，曾因使用的喷雾器损坏而浑身被液体浸透。此后，他全身开始出现皮疹和溃疡。
2018年，约翰逊从农达的生产商孟山都处获得了2.89亿美元的标志性和解金，法院认定孟山都应对他的确诊负责。
帮助他打赢这场官司的正是小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪，当时他是加州的一名环保律师。
罗伯托·施密特/法新社/盖蒂图片社
在随后的上诉程序中，约翰逊的和解金被缩减至2040万美元。但这起案件标志着针对现已被拜耳收购的孟山都的众多责任诉讼中的首个胜诉判决。
尽管该公司此后已承诺就其被指造成健康损害的索赔支付数十亿美元——包括2月份提出的72.5亿美元和解方案——但拜耳始终坚称农达是安全的，并表示其与癌症的所谓关联并未得到证实。该公司援引美国环境保护署对该产品的审查结果及其标签，称标签中未提及癌症风险。
最高法院审理的这起案件将决定美国人能否再对拜耳提起诉讼。原告方由一名密苏里州男子牵头，该男子称自己因经常使用该产品而患上癌症。
“现在是美国司法系统确立这一原则的时候了：企业不应因遵守联邦警告标签要求而根据州法律受到惩罚，”拜耳首席执行官比尔·安德森在今年1月最高法院同意受理此案后的一份声明中说道。
在提交给最高法院的案情摘要中，美国副检察长D·约翰·索尔写道：“美国环保署已多次认定草甘膦不太可能对人类致癌，且该机构多次批准了未标注癌症警告的农达标签。”
怪异的政治盟友
汤姆·威廉姆斯/美联社
现任卫生与公众服务部部长肯尼迪能获得这一职位，部分原因是他承诺禁止草甘膦并限制杀虫剂的使用。
但特朗普政府随后下令增加该化学品的国内生产，放弃了其可能有害的说法，并支持拜耳，辩称农业化学品的安全性和风险应由美国环保署而非法院来裁定。
在草甘膦问题上的立场引发了传统保守派与MAHA选民之间的紧张关系，后者称自己为特朗普2024年胜选提供了关键选票。
关于杀虫剂的观点也形成了不同寻常——尽管脆弱——的政治联盟。
周一集会的发言者将包括共和党众议员托马斯·马西和民主党参议员科里·布克，他们都是MAHA的支持者，还有环保主义者。
几位人士表示，他们此前从未见过针对杀虫剂采取行动的势头如此强劲。但与此同时，人们也对要求更多使用杀虫剂的反对力量感到担忧。
“我们正处于一个自相矛盾的时刻，攻击比以往任何时候都更猛烈。特朗普政府削弱了健康和环境保护措施，为化学密集型农业打下了更牢固的基础，”第三代农民、生态组织“地球之友”活动家萨拉·斯塔曼说道。
“但与此同时，公众反对杀虫剂、支持清理我们环境中的有毒化学品、支持健康食品和农业的势头如此强劲。”
MAHA、中期选举与判断失误
据了解后勤细节的人士透露，白宫与MAHA妈妈们的这次会面是由埃丽卡·柯克和政府内部的MAHA盟友促成的，他们认为在中期选举前保持该运动的支持至关重要。
对克拉克而言，周一的集会将凸显这种紧迫性。
“妈妈们不希望自己的孩子被无法从农产品上洗掉、也无法避开的杀虫剂毒害，她们甚至会在空气中吸入这些物质。这才是妈妈们真正关心的事情，”她告诉CNN。“没人会投票，没人会集会，没人会去投票站，但如果妈妈们感到愤怒，她们要么会去投票，要么就会弃权。这是你最不想惹恼、也最不想失去支持的群体。”
一些维权人士警告称，这种情况已经在发生。除了特朗普下令增加该化学品的生产外，美国政府去年8月发布的一份美国慢性病报告放弃了肯尼迪此前关于杀虫剂所谓危害的言论。国会也在审议一项拟议法案，无论最高法院作出何种裁决，该法案都将有效保护杀虫剂制造商免于进一步的法律责任。
安格斯·莫丹特/彭博社/盖蒂图片社
在整个辩论过程中，一些农业组织警告称，任何限制杀虫剂使用的行动都可能使农作物容易受到杂草和害虫的侵害，从而破坏美国的粮食供应。
在本月举行的多场预算听证会上，多名议员就他此前关于监管该化学品的承诺向他发难，肯尼迪为总统的行动和自己的信念进行了辩护。
“我非常明确地告诉总统，我对这项关于提高草甘膦产量的行政命令感到不满，”他周二说道。“总统认为这出于国家安全方面的必要，”他补充道。
当被直接问及该化学品是否会致癌时，他回答：“是的。”
接受CNN采访的MAHA倡导者表示，他们理解需要兼顾各方情况，并非要求全面禁止，而是要求更好的标签和保护措施。
除了最高法院的这场斗争外，美国环保署将于10月——也就是中期选举前几周——发布一项法院命令要求进行的草甘膦安全性审查。众议院版本的农业法案中有一项条款将该审查期限推迟至2031年。
对MAHA活动人士而言，这是他们所称的一系列斗争中的又一场，这些斗争将在11月激发他们的选民基础。
“草甘膦将成为中期选举的议题，因为特朗普政府让它成了一个议题，”以“美食宝贝”博客闻名的食品与健康影响博主瓦尼·哈里说道。
“这就是我们正在为之奋斗的目标，这就是我们正在思考的事情。我们必须做出一些有意义的改变。”
A Supreme Court case over pesticides is bringing out the ‘MAHA moms’ — and threats of consequences for the midterms
2026-04-27T10:00:51.197Z / CNN
By Sarah Owermohle
PUBLISHED Apr 27, 2026, 6:00 AM ET
An employee adjusts Roundup products on a shelf at a store in San Rafael, California, on July, 9, 2018.
Josh Edelson/AFP/Getty Images
When a group of mothers and wellness influencers,including surgeon general nominee Casey Means, was asked to go to the White House this month, some of them assumed a few staffers would hear their grievances about the health risks of weedkillers.
Instead, it turned into a two-hour session in a “jam-packed” room with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., White House chief of staff Susie Wiles and the president himself stopping in, according to Alex Clark, a “Make America Healthy Again” influencer who was among the attendees.
“They just let us talk — they let us get everything off of our chest,” said Clark, who hosts “Culture Apothecary,” a MAHA-themed podcast produced by Turning Point USA.
There was a lot for Clark and the “MAHA moms” in the room to air. Top of mind was the commonly used weedkiller glyphosate and calls to reduce its use and investigate its safety.
On Monday, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that could define a long-fought battle over whether one of the most commonly used weedkillers in the United States is safe — an issue that is being seen as a test of how much power the Make America Healthy Again movement can actually hold in Washington.
The lawsuit against Bayer, the makers of Roundup — the brand name for glyphosate — will determine whether people can continue to sue the company over illnesses allegedly caused by its product.
But regardless of the outcome of the case, which is expected to be decided in June, the issue of limiting pesticides has long energized the MAHA base.
Hundreds of protesters are expected to convene in front of the court ahead of the arguments, where more than 30 speakers will rally attendees to push for more pesticide protections.
The roots of a high-profile case
DeWayne “Lee” Johnson, a San Francisco school groundskeeper, was just 42 when he was diagnosed in 2014 with terminal non-Hodgkins lymphoma. For years, he had sprayed the herbicide Roundup around the grounds he maintained, once becoming drenched in liquid after a sprayer he used broke. After that, he began seeing rashes and lesions all over his body.
In 2018, Johnson won a landmark $289 million settlement from Monsanto, the maker of Roundup, which was found liable for his diagnosis.
The man who helped him win was RFK Jr., then an environmental lawyer in California.
The sun rises above a facade of the US Supreme Court building in Washington, DC, on March 31, 2026.
Roberto Schmidt/Getty Images
Through subsequent court appeals, Johnson’s settlement was reduced to $20.4 million. But it marked the first decision in one of many liability cases that have been mounted against Monsanto, now owned by Bayer.
Although the company has since committed to pay out billions of dollars over claims that it is liable for health harms — including a proposed $7.25 billion settlement in February — Bayer has maintained that Roundup is safe and that its alleged links to cancer are unproved. The company has pointed to the Environmental Protection Agency’s review of the product and its label, which makes no mention of cancer.
The case before the Supreme Court will determine whether Americans can bring further cases against Bayer. The plaintiffs are led by a Missouri man who argues he got cancer after regularly using the product.
“It is time for the U.S. legal system to establish that companies should not be punished under state laws for complying with federal warning label requirements,” Bayer CEO Bill Anderson said in a January statement after the court agreed to take up the case.
In a brief filed with the court, US Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote that the “EPA has repeatedly determined that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic in humans, and the agency has repeatedly approved RoundUp labels that did not contain cancer warnings.”
Strange political bedfellows
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. participates in a discussion in Washington, DC, on April 2.
Tom Williams/AP
Kennedy, now secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, landed the role in part with promises to ban glyphosate and rein in pesticide use.
But the Trump administration has since ordered more domestic production of the chemical, backed away from suggestions it may be harmful, and thrown its support behind Bayer by arguing that it is up to the Environmental Protection Agency, not the courts, to decide the safety and risks of agricultural chemicals.
The positions on glyphosate have sparked tension between traditional conservatives and the MAHA voters who argue they provided pivotal votes to secure Trump’s 2024 win.
Views on pesticides have also forged unusual — if tenuous — political alliances.
Speakers at the rally on Monday will include Republican Rep. Thomas Massie and Democratic Sen. Cory Booker, MAHA supporters, and environmentalists.
Several said they have never seen momentum for action on pesticides like this before. Yet there is also alarm over an opposing force to use more of them.
“We’re in one of those paradoxical moments where the attacks are worse than ever. The Trump administration has gutted protections for health and for the environment, and they’ve done more to entrench chemical intensive agriculture,” said Sarah Starman, a third-generation farmer and campaigner with ecological group Friends of the Earth.
“But at the same time, the public momentum against pesticides and behind cleaning up toxic chemicals in our environment and behind healthy food and farming is so strong.”
MAHA, midterms and miscalculations
The Oval Office meeting with MAHA moms was facilitated by Erika Kirk and MAHA allies in the administration who see the importance of keeping the movement’s support heading into the midterm election, according to people familiar with the logistics.
To Clark, the rally on Monday will underscore that urgency.
“Mothers do not want their kids poisoned by pesticides that cannot wash off produce and they cannot get away from, and they’re breathing it in, in the air. That is what matters to moms,” she told CNN. “And nobody votes, and nobody rallies, and nobody shows up to the polls, or doesn’t show up to the polls if they’re mad, like a mother. This is the No. 1 group that you do not want to piss off and that you do not want to lose on your side.”
Some advocates warn that is already happening. Besides Trump’s order to produce more of the chemical, a government report last August on chronic disease in America backed away from earlier Kennedy rhetoric about the alleged harms of pesticides. Congress is also wrestling over a proposed law that would effectively shield pesticide manufacturers from further liability, regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision.
A worker rides a tractor while spraying organic pesticide on crops at a farm in Hudson, New York, in May 2020.
Angus Mordant/Bloomberg/Getty Images
Throughout the debate, some farming organizations have warned that any action restricting pesticide use could destabilize the American food supply by leaving crops vulnerable to weeds and vermin.
During a marathon of budget hearings this month in which several lawmakers grilled him on his earlier promises about regulating the chemical, Kennedy sought to defend both the president’s action and his own beliefs.
“I was very clear with the president about my own displeasure with the executive order,” regarding ramping up glyphosate production, he said on Tuesday. “The president felt it was necessary for national security reasons,” he added.
Asked directly whether the chemical causes cancer, he replied: “Yes.”
MAHA advocates who spoke to CNN said they understand the need for nuance, and are not asking for a ban but better labeling and protections.
Besides the fight before the Supreme Court, the EPA is due to release a court-ordered review of glyphosate’s safety in October — weeks ahead of the midterm elections. A provision in the House version of farming legislation would push that deadline to 2031.
For MAHA activists, it is another in a series of battles they say will energize their voting base come November.
“Glyphosate is going to be a midterm issue because the Trump administration made it an issue,” said Vani Hari, a food and wellness influencer known for her “Food Babe” blog.
“This is what we’re marching towards, this is what we’re thinking about. We got to make some meaningful change.”