Ridicules Farmers’ Right to Grow Food without Genetic Contamination and Economic Harm

New York, NY – Judge Naomi Buchwald’s February 24 decision dismissing the case of Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association et al v. Monsanto was met with great disappointment by organic farmers, seed growers and agricultural organizations—and a renewed commitment to fight on.

Daniel Ravicher, lead attorney for the 81 plaintiffs represented in the lawsuit, said, “While I have great respect for Judge Buchwald, her decision to deny farmers the right to seek legal protection from one of the world’s foremost patent bullies is gravely disappointing.”

“Her belief,” added Ravicher, “that farmers are acting unreasonably when they stop growing certain crops to avoid being sued by Monsanto for patent infringement, should their crops become contaminated, maligns the intelligence and integrity of those farmers.”

Ravicher said the judge failed to address the purpose of the Declaratory Judgment Act and mischaracterized the Supreme Court precedent that supports the farmers’ standing. “In sum, her opinion is flawed on both the facts and the law. Thankfully, the plaintiffs have the right to proceed to the Court of Appeals, which will review the matter without deference to her findings,” the attorney said.

Monsanto’s history of aggressive investigations and lawsuits brought against farmers in America has been a source of concern for organic and non-GMO agricultural producers since Monsanto’s first lawsuit brought against a farmer in the mid-‘90s. Since then, 144 farmers have had lawsuits filed against them by Monsanto for alleged violations of their patented seed technology.

Monsanto has sued more than 700 additional farmers who have settled out-of-court rather than face Monsanto’s belligerent, and well-financed, litigious actions.

Many of these farmers claim to not have had the intention to grow or save seeds that contain Monsanto’s patented genes. Seed contamination and pollen drift from genetically engineered crops often migrate to neighboring fields. If Monsanto’s seed technology is found on a farmer’s land without a contract the farmer can be found liable for patent infringement.

“Family farmers need the protection of the court,” said Maine organic seed farmer Jim Gerritsen, President of the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association, the lead plaintiff.

Gerritsen added, “We reject as naïve and indefensible the judge’s assertion that Monsanto’s vague public relations ‘commitment [not to sue farmers for ‘trace amounts’ of their seeds are genetically engineered traits], should be ‘a source of comfort’ to plaintiffs. The truth is we are under threat and we do not believe Monsanto.”

The plaintiffs brought the suit against Monsanto to seek judicial protection from such lawsuits and challenge the validity of Monsanto’s patents on seeds.

“Monsanto is the big biotechnology bully and has used the courts, for years, to intimidate farmers,” said Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst at The Cornucopia Institute, another plaintiff. “The purpose of our lawsuit is to preemptively challenge its reign of intimidation over organic farmers, and others, who have chosen not to jump on their genetically engineered bandwagon.”

Another plaintiff, organic farmer Bryce Stephens of Kansas, added, “As a citizen and property owner, I find the Order by the Federal Court to be obsequious to Monsanto.”

“Seeds are the memory of life,” said Isaura Anduluz of plaintiff Cuatro Puertas in New Mexico. “If planted and saved annually, cross pollination ensures the seeds continue to adapt. In the Southwest, selection over many, many generations has resulted in native drought tolerant corn. Now that a [Monsanto’s] patented drought tolerant corn has been released how do we protect our seeds from contamination and our right to farm?”


A copy of Judge Buchwald’s ruling is located here:

Stay Engaged

Sign up for The Cornucopia Institute’s eNews and action alerts to stay informed about organic food and farm issues.

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.