Skip to content
Georgia Commons
Menu

House · Introduced · 2025-2026 Regular Session

HB 424: Agriculture; clarify that a manufacturer cannot be held liable for failing to warn consumers of health risks above those required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency

Last action April 4, 2025 · House Withdrawn, Recommitted

A Georgia House bill would say that pesticide labels approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency count as a sufficient warning, shielding manufacturers from state lawsuits claiming they should have warned of more health risks.

Read the full bill text

These buttons carry the bill's own text, not the summaries below. Copy for LLM, View as markdown, and Send to AI use the Markdown version: the text as filed, then the summaries under a heading that names them as ours. View raw is the text alone.

The summaries below were written by an AI model (claude-sonnet-5) from the text of the bill and are not part of it. Quote the text, not the summary. The stored text is the Comm Sub version, the latest the General Assembly's website lists.

In plain language

Georgia law currently lets people sue over products, including pesticides, if a manufacturer failed to adequately warn consumers of health risks. This bill adds a new Code section saying that starting January 1, 2026, any pesticide registered with Georgia's Commissioner of Agriculture or with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the federal Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) is treated as having a sufficient warning label if that label was approved by the EPA or matches the EPA's most recent human health risk assessment. That means a person could not sue a pesticide manufacturer under Georgia law for failing to warn of health risks beyond what the EPA-approved label already covers. The bill's preamble lists legislative findings about Georgia's agriculture economy and concerns about dependence on foreign, especially Chinese, sources for pesticide ingredients, framing the change as support for domestic pesticide production.

What the bill does

  • Creates a new Georgia Code section (2-7-171) stating that EPA-approved pesticide labels count as sufficient warnings under state law.
  • Blocks lawsuits under any state law duty-to-warn theory, or common law failure-to-warn claims, that argue a pesticide label should have said more than the EPA required.
  • Applies the rule to pesticides registered either with Georgia's Commissioner of Agriculture or directly with the EPA under the federal FIFRA law.
  • Sets the new rule to take effect January 1, 2026.
  • Includes legislative findings about agriculture's $91 billion contribution to Georgia's economy and concerns about reliance on Chinese-made pesticide ingredients.

Who it affects

Pesticide manufacturers and sellers, Georgia farmers who use crop protection products, and Georgians who might otherwise sue a manufacturer over inadequate health warnings on a pesticide label are all affected, as are courts handling such claims.

Why it matters

If someone is harmed by a pesticide and believes the label should have warned of risks beyond what the EPA required, this bill would prevent them from winning a failure-to-warn lawsuit in Georgia courts as long as the label matches EPA standards, shifting more legal protection to manufacturers.

Key provisions

  • Section 1 lists legislative findings about Georgia agriculture's economic importance and concerns about foreign dependence for pesticide ingredients.
  • Section 2 adds new Code Section 2-7-171, defining 'Environmental Protection Agency' and 'FIFRA' for purposes of the new rule.
  • Section 2(b) states that an EPA-approved or FIFRA risk-assessment-consistent pesticide label is deemed a sufficient warning for any state law or common law duty-to-warn claim, effective January 1, 2026.
  • Section 3 repeals any conflicting laws.

From the bill

“shall be deemed a sufficient warning label for the purposes of an action commenced under any provision of state law concerning the duty to warn or label, or any other common law duty to warn.”

This is the core legal shield the bill creates for pesticide manufacturers using EPA-approved labels.

“Dependence on Chinese imports for critical ingredients in crop protection products creates supply chain vulnerabilities for the United States and opportunities for foreign adversaries to restrict access to crop protection products for American farmers”

A legislative finding explaining the bill's stated rationale about supply chain security.

Status timeline

  1. 2025-04-04House Withdrawn, Recommitted (House)
  2. 2025-02-19House Committee Favorably Reported By Substitute (House)
  3. 2025-02-18House Second Readers (House)
  4. 2025-02-13House First Readers (House)
  5. 2025-02-12House Hopper (House)

Sponsors

  • Steven Meeks (R, HD-178)Primary sponsor
  • Robert Dickey (R, HD-134)
  • James Burchett (R, HD-176)
  • Will Wade (R, HD-9)
  • Lauren McDonald III (R, HD-26)
  • Bruce Williamson (R, HD-112)

Topics

  • pesticide regulation
  • agriculture law
  • product liability
  • farming
  • EPA labeling

Ask about this bill

Answers come from this document. Not legal advice.

Machine-readable https://georgiacommons.org/bills/2025-2026/hb424.md · https://georgiacommons.org/bills/index.md · MCP https://mcp.georgiacommons.org/mcp

HB424: Agriculture; clarify that a manufacturer cannot be held liable for failing to warn consumers of health risks above those required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency | Georgia Commons