President Donald Trump’s move to boost domestic production of a widely used weedkiller is facing swift and fierce backlash from some supporters of the Make America Healthy Again movement, a key part of his political coalition.
On Wednesday evening, Trump released an executive order calling glyphosate — the active ingredient in Bayer’s Roundup products — crucial to the country’s “national security and defense.” Tens of thousands of plaintiffs in lawsuits have alleged that the herbicide causes non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and Bayer has sought legal immunity from such claims.
Trump’s order has reopened fissures on the issue between the administration and the MAHA movement started by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was part of a legal team that in 2018 won a $289 million judgment against Roundup’s manufacturer, Monsanto. Bayer later acquired Monsanto.
MAHA activists say pesticides contribute to childhood health problems and want to limit their use. While running for president as an independent in 2024, Kennedy said glyphosate “is one of the likely culprits in America’s chronic disease epidemic.” Since Kennedy joined a Republican administration traditionally allied with agricultural and other interests that favor pesticides, he has largely refrained from criticizing their use.
White House spokesman Kush Desai said the president’s executive order “is not an endorsement of any product or practice” and is necessary to build modern weapons systems and ensure that the United States grows enough food. (The other chemical mentioned in the order, elemental phosphorus, is used in certain military equipment.)
The Department of Health and Human Services and the Agriculture Department “are pursuing more research into sustainable agricultural practices, including new crop protection tools,” he said in a statement. “President Trump pledged to protect our country and Make America Healthy Again, and this Administration will never compromise on either priority.”
The Trump administration is invoking the Defense Production Act — a Cold War-era law granting the president broad authority to direct domestic industry to boost production — for glyphosate.
Depending on how the executive order is implemented, some MAHA and environmental activists said, they believe it could shield glyphosate manufacturers from certain liability suits. Key MAHA leaders are working to boost Republicans in the midterms, but some say the executive order could jeopardize their alliance.
Zen Honeycutt, a longtime Kennedy supporter and the founder and executive director of the nonprofit Moms Across America, warned that Trump was alienating voters who helped put him in office — many of them mothers who voted Republican for the first time in 2024 and could be hard-pressed to do so again.
“Without restricting and/or banning glyphosate, we will not make America healthy again,” Honeycutt said.
Asked for comment on the executive order, Bayer sent a statement attributable to Monsanto, saying that the order “reinforces the critical need for U.S. farmers to have access to essential, domestically produced crop protection tools such as glyphosate. We will comply with this order to produce glyphosate and elemental phosphorus.” On Tuesday, Monsanto announced a proposed $7.25 billion settlement to resolve the cancer lawsuits without admitting liability or wrongdoing.
Regulators in the United States and Europe have offered different assessments on the cancer risks of glyphosate. The Environmental Protection Agency has said the chemical “is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans,” and a European Chemicals Agency committee has said that “classifying glyphosate as a carcinogen is not justified.” But the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified it as “probably” carcinogenic to humans.
One journal recently retracted a 2000 study that found glyphosate to be safe, citing evidence that the authors may have had help from Monsanto employees in writing the study.
The industry has defended widely used pesticides. CropLife America — a trade group that represents the companies that formulate, manufacture and distribute pesticides — said the products help support “a reliable, healthy, and affordable food supply” and are thoroughly evaluated by the EPA.
Kennedy’s nomination to lead HHS faced initial skepticism from some farm-state Republicans. During his confirmation hearings, he pledged that he would not pursue policies that put them out of business and reminded lawmakers that the nation’s health department does not oversee farming regulation.
In a statement, Kennedy said Wednesday’s executive order “puts America first where it matters most — our defense readiness and our food supply.”
“We must safeguard America’s national security first, because all of our priorities depend on it,” Kennedy said. “When hostile actors control critical inputs, they weaken our security. By expanding domestic production, we close that gap and protect American families.”
Kennedy said on a podcast released this month that HHS was looking into alternatives to glyphosate, but “right now if you end glyphosate outright it would put out of business 80 percent of our farmers.”
“It’s not a good long-term solution,” he said. “The issue is how do you transition off of it without putting farmers out of business?”
Vani Hari, an author, activist and Kennedy ally who also writes under the name “Food Babe,” described being “speechless” when she saw the executive order Wednesday evening.
“We truly were hoping that this administration would put people over corporate power,” she said in an interview, “but this action moves us away from that commitment.”
On X, Hari blamed the chemical lobby and urged the MAHA movement to unify against powerful corporations.
Tony Lyons, head of the nonprofit advocacy group MAHA Action, which has pushed back against pesticide shields, did not respond to a request for comment.
MAHA has been thrown under the bus. https://t.co/YobbwXRwGh
— Nicolas Hulscher, MPH (@NicHulscher) February 19, 2026
Zach Lahn — a farmer who is a Republican candidate for governor in Iowa and has been endorsed by MAHA Action — opposed the president’s executive order.
“There is no pending ban or shortage of glyphosate,” he wrote on X. “There is only pending lawsuits for a foreign company that is causing harm to Americans. And now they have immunity — this must be reversed.”
Some MAHA allies have been frustrated by the Trump administration’s messaging around pesticides, believing that it has gone too far in capitulating to the industry. Last year, the MAHA Commission to address childhood chronic disease released a strategy document that did not call for restricting pesticides and instead said the EPA would work to ensure that the public is aware of its “robust” review procedures.
Administration officials have said discussions around the future of U.S. agriculture are exceedingly complex.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments this year in a case involving the Roundup litigation. If the court rules in Bayer’s favor, the company could be immune from expensive lawsuits in state courts over the chemical’s health impacts.
On Capitol Hill, MAHA allies have been fighting efforts in Congress that they say could effectively block lawsuits against pesticide-makers if the EPA-approved label does not warn about a pesticide’s harm. Bayer has previously said the provision would not prevent people from suing pesticide manufacturers.
The post Trump order to promote weedkiller sparks fury in MAHA movement appeared first on Washington Post.
