If the plaintiffs attorney stated or implied that Roundup is the same as or similar to Agent Orange, that alone should be grounds for appeal. That inference could clearly sway the jury on emotional and not factual grounds.
I would say that it is more shows their character. The EPA is in the back pocket of these companies as shown by the most recent judgement outlawing chlorpyrifos. They do not care about health. They care about profits. The EPA is to be representing the citizens of the USA, not the big ag companies.
Don’t be a simpleton. The citizens of the United States also have an interest in not being told what to do by the federal government if the federal government can’t prove a scientific interest of the public.
Assuming the government always is competent, with pure motives, divorced from the career and other selfish interests of individuals who work there, and that the government operates completely clean from political favors is how children think.
If the plaintiffs attorney stated or implied that Roundup is the same as or similar to Agent Orange, that alone should be grounds for appeal. That inference could clearly sway the jury on emotional and not factual grounds.
I would say that it is more shows their character. The EPA is in the back pocket of these companies as shown by the most recent judgement outlawing chlorpyrifos. They do not care about health. They care about profits. The EPA is to be representing the citizens of the USA, not the big ag companies.
Don’t be a simpleton. The citizens of the United States also have an interest in not being told what to do by the federal government if the federal government can’t prove a scientific interest of the public.
Assuming the government always is competent, with pure motives, divorced from the career and other selfish interests of individuals who work there, and that the government operates completely clean from political favors is how children think.