Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Product Liability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate passes bill limiting failure‑to‑warn claims against pesticide makers after long debate
Summary
The Tennessee Senate approved legislation that narrows certain failure‑to‑warn product‑liability claims for pesticides when manufacturers comply with federal EPA labeling, after extended floor debate about consumer protection, agricultural impacts and corporate liability.
Senator Stevens, sponsor of Senate Bill 5 27, told colleagues that the bill "limits liability in the event that there is a claim related to the label" and that it applies when a manufacturer has complied with federally mandated labeling.
The measure, presented with a Judiciary Committee amendment, drew hours of debate about whether federal EPA labels should preclude Tennessee tort claims. Opponents said the bill would effectively shield manufacturers from suits by people alleging harm from pesticides and other chemical products. Senator Campbell said, "We're taking a side in the risk analysis" and warned the change could leave injured Tennesseans without meaningful recovery. Senator Lamar described the bill as "protecting manufacturers from being held not liable for producing cancer causing chemicals."
Sponsors and supporters argued the bill provides predictability for farmers and manufacturers that rely on EPA‑approved labels and that other legal causes of action would remain available. Senator Stevens said the bill focuses narrowly on "failure to warn" claims and that plaintiffs could still sue on design or manufacturing defects or other legal theories.
After members debated examples including consumer and agricultural formulations and labeling processes, the Senate voted to pass the bill on third and final consideration (ayes 21, nays 7). The sponsor said the bill seeks to align state liability exposure with federal labeling authority and to reduce litigation risk that supporters said could harm agriculture and supply chains.
The next procedural step is transmission to the other chamber (if not already enrolled) and any gubernatorial consideration; no timeline for implementation was announced on the floor.
