We listened to the full arguments and, while predicting an outcome is always difficult, our overall impression is that Monsanto had stronger arguments and is more likely than not to prevail; a somewhat subdued bench makes a prediction harder than usual, but on balance, the weight of questioning seemed to suggest that Monsanto had the upper hand.

Separately, Bayer is pursuing a proposed $6.25 bn to $7.25 bn class settlement in Missouri in King v Monsanto designed to capture a broad universe of current and future claimants, though significant execution risks remain, including class certification, opt-out, and appellate risk.

President Trump’s February 2026 executive order invoking the Defense Production Act to protect domestic glyphosate supply adds a third leg to Bayer’s liability-management strategy, though its practical legal effect on pending civil claims remains limited and uncertain.

Taken together, a SCOTUS victory, a successful class settlement, and favorable executive branch action would constitute a formidable “1-2-3 punch” that, if it succeeds, would allow Bayer/Monsanto to manage one of the largest mass tort overhangs in recent corporate history without resort to bankruptcy, including the controversial Texas two-step maneuver that is itself under mounting pressure in the courts and in Congress.