Monsanto GM seed ban is overturned by US Supreme Court - BBC

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7-2 decision. It beats me how testing the seeds before selling is "unconstitutional".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/us_and_canada/10371831.stm

The bio-tech company Monsanto can sell genetically modified seeds before safety tests on them are completed, the US Supreme Court has ruled. A lower court had barred the sale of the modified alfalfa seeds until an environmental impact study could be carried out. The seed is modified to be resistant to Monsanto's brand of weedkiller.

The US is the world's largest producer of alfalfa, a grass-like plant used as animal feed. It is the fourth most valuable crop grown in the country.

Environmentalists had argued that there might be a risk of cross-pollination between genetically modified plants and neighbouring crops.They also argued over-use of the company's weedkiller Roundup, the chemical treatment the alfalfa is modified to be resistant to, could cause pollution of ground water and lead to resistant "super-weeds".

But Monsanto says claims its products were dangerous amounted to "bad science fiction with no support on the record".

[mediaman007]

1. Move on, nothing to see here!

[eShirl]

2. k&r

screw Monsanto with a splintery stick!

[Alameda]

3. Activist Judges.....!!!

can't they be impeached????

[Ruby the Liberal]

4. I would find it difficult to feign sympathy if an asteroid took out the current SCOTUS.

While I would mourn the loss of some, a 7-2 on this is beyond the pale.

[kgnu_fan]

5. My pesimism deepens

[Art_from_Ark]

6. That must have been some contorted logic they used

to find that requiring testing of genetically modified plants before release was "unconstitutional". What part of the Constitution did they base THAT ruling on? The 13th Amendment? The 20th? The 21st? :crazy:

And if Monsanto's claims that concerns about its products were "bad science fiction with no support on the record", why would they object to testing?

[polly7]

7. "bad science fiction with no support on the record"

They are bullying, lying thieves. Just one example of 'proof' of cross-pollination they tried to cash in on.

http://www.keepmainefree.org/percymonsanto.html

http://www.percyschmeiser.com/conflict.htm

"The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with Schmeiser, ruling that he didn't have to pay Monsanto anything"

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Actually they ruled in favor of Monsanto.

The court just decided that he didn't have to pay them any money because he didn't profit off of his theft.

[polly7]

15. There was no theft.

It was a case of cross-pollination. Yep, I wrote that before reading the second article. You're right, that was the court's ruling.

"Monsanto originally said in the lawsuit that we had stolen their seed, but in two years of pre-trial, Monsanto withdrew all those allegations — that I had ever obtained seed illegally. They went on to say that the allegations were false; but they said that did not matter, that because some of Monsanto’s GMO canola plants were in the ditch along my field, I violated the patent."

We farmed canola too, and many years the neighbour's canola wound up along our fence-line worse than any weed. Ask farmers what they really think of this seed.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. The Supreme Court ruled otherwise.

It was not a case of cross pollination. Monsanto proved to the courts that Percy Schmeiser intentionally planted the seeds.

If the anti-GM movement wants to get serious, they need to stop getting behind liars like Percy Schmeiser.

[polly7]

18. Put up Monsanto's 'proof'.

I'm not a liar and I saw plenty of their rotten weed which, if we'd had canola planted on those quarters would have ended us up in the exact same position as the 'liar' Mr. Schmeiser.

Link.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. I didn't say you were a liar, I'm saying Percy Schmeiser's a liar.

And that's fairly old news.

If you want to read more about it, you can find the facts here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Canada_Inc._v._Schmeiser#Judgment

[polly7]

21. No, he wasn't lying about anything, and the Supreme court didn't

rule he was. Neither did Monsanto prove he lied about anything.

"The Court dismissed the argument that "use" of patented cells or genes applied only in the context of their isolated form. Nor does the fact that Schmeiser did not use Roundup herbicide on his crops preclude "use" of the gene. Even though the plants propagate without human intervention the realities of modern agriculture mean there is always human intervention in the growth of plants and thus farming is a method of "use" of plant genes." - your link.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. ...

Regarding his 1998 crop, Schmeiser did not put forward any defence of accidental contamination. The evidence showed that the level of Roundup Ready canola in Mr. Schmeiser's 1998 fields was 95-98% (See paragraph 53 of the trial ruling). Evidence was presented indicating that such a level of purity could not occur by accidental means. On the basis of this the court found that Schmeiser had either known "or ought to have known" that he had planted Roundup Ready canola in 1998.

[polly7]

24. 'without human intervention'

My Schmeiser states he didn't use Monsanto's seed. Every farmer around here was rooting for him. I won't disbelieve him at all, but you carry on.

http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=seeds_tmln&seeds_legal_actions=seeds_legalMonsantoVSchmeiser

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. "My Schmeiser states he didn't use Monsanto's seed."

Yeah, and that's why Schmeiser's a liar. You'll notice he dropped the claim after Monsanto showed in court he was lying.

[polly7]

27. LOL

No, I won't notice something that didn't happen.


"April 18, 2002: Mexico Finds More Evidence of GM Contamination in Native Mexican Maize Jorge Soberon, the executive secretary of Mexico’s biodiversity commission, announces that government scientists have confirmed that genetically modified (GM) corn is growing in Mexico. The finding supports what two US scientists reported several months earlier (see Late November 2001) in a highly controversial paper published in the journal Science. Calling it the “world’s worst case of contamination by GM material,” he says 95 percent of the sites sampled in Oaxaca and Puebla were found to have GM maize. Samples taken from these sites indicated a contamination level as high as 35 percent. " http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=seeds_tmln&seeds_legal_actions=seeds_legalMonsantoVSchmeiser

Poor Monsanto.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

28. Does that have anything to do with Schmeiser's case?

No? Then fail.

[polly7]

30. No, it's just another example of GM seeds contaminating crops

on a massive scale.

"Yet, when the time came, neither my lawyer nor I was notified. Agents from the Robinson Investigation firm, the hired henchman for Monsanto, showed up in my driveway with bags marked "Monsanto" and "Percy Schmeiser." They claimed that they had been out sampling my field that day and that the bags marked with my name were mine to have tested. Funny thing is, I’d been in and around the fields all day and hadn’t seen them. What’s more, the land descriptions on the sample bags were for areas that I didn’t even farm."......

"At trial, Hofmann, a good friend to the local Monsanto representative, testified that he had found the sample. My lawyer, Terry Zakreski, pointed out that it would be difficult to know, after the passage of two years, the origin of the seed. To wit, I had not cleaned my saved (bin run) seed, full of chaff, that I delivered to Humboldt Flour Mills in 1998 for inoculation. The one-pound sample that the mill later returned to me was in the same condition. Contrast that with what Monsanto claimed Hofmann had discovered: 20 pounds of clean seed in Saskatchewan Wheat Pool bags.

I ran into Hofmann after the trial. He apologized to me for lying about supplying Monsanto with a sample of clean Roundup Ready canola seed for use in court. He told me that Monsanto had taken him on trips, to lunch and given him free products to use on his farm."

http://percyschmeiser.com/Monsanto%20Lying.htm

Let's see ...... a farmer with a record of good crops using his own seed, or Monsanto. I'll take the farmer's word.

[riderinthestorm]

32. Thanks Polly, I'm late to this OP.

My own organic fields lie too close to a traditional Illinois farmer to be certified organic.

Thus the conundrum: how much of our neighbor's crop contaminates our own.

I know I'm farming organically, but what of cross-pollination that we have no control over?

It happens. It's tragic. I don't like it.

Thanks for posting. More awareness needs to happen about Monsanto's insane reach.

[polly7]

36. Yw, thanks for your reply.

All the work and effort to grow organic and not be able to certify your fields is really too bad. This piece states crops were contaminated with seed from more than a km away ...... unreal.

May 2000: Seed Imported from Canada Contaminated with Genetically Modified Seed Canadian canola seeds sold to Europe by Advanta Canada are discovered to be contaminated with a small percentage of genetically modified (GM) seeds. The contamination resulted from pollen that was blown in from a farm growing GM crops more than a kilometer away. European citizens and governments are outraged and farmers in some of the countries plow their crops under.

http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=seeds_tmln&seeds_legal_actions=seeds_legalMonsantoVSchmeiser

The Home page for this link has some really good info on GE and seeds.

[polly7]

31. ...

"January 1999: Monsanto Employee Conducts Grow-out Tests of Seeds Taken From Percy Schmeiser’s Farm Aaron Mitchell, Monsanto’s lead investigator in the Percy Schmeiser case, obtains a back-up sample set of the canola pods that were collected from Schmeiser’s property the previous summer (see August 12, 1998) from James Vancha who has been storing the pods in his freezer. Mitchell takes the seeds to Leon Perehudoff of Prairie Plant Systems who assists him with the grow-out test. Perehudoff will later testify in court that the seeds he receives are clean, though the original sample set of canola pods contained debris. Mitchell claims that he cleaned the seeds by hand even though there would have been no reason to do so in order to grow the seeds. When he is later asked in court to explain how he did this, he will respond that he did it by hand and that it took him about an hour. Another witness, Lyle Friesen, a plant biologist at the University, will testify that the task should have taken “days” to do by hand. All of the seeds included in Mitchell’s grow-out test germinate despite the fact that neither Monsanto’s St. Louis lab nor Friesen (see (August 26, 1999)) are able to so because the seeds were improperly stored and/or moldy. After the plants have grown, Mitchell takes them away to spray them and then later returns with them so he and Perehudoff can count the survivors. For one of the samples, he records an impossible survivor rate of 106 percent—there are apparently more plants in the sample after the spraying than there were before. He then averages this percentage rate with results from the other samples to come up with an average survival rate of 92-96 percent, which Monsanto will later cite as the percentage of Roundup Ready Canola plants in Schmeiser’s 1998 fields. As Schmeiser’s lawyer will later note in court, the samples were not collected using a methodology that would have ensured that the composition of the samples were representative of the composition of the fields."

http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=seeds_tmln&seeds_legal_actions=seeds_legalMonsantoVSchmeiser

[Kalun D]

34. The anti GM movement?

Every human being that cares about life should be anti GM, It's satan's spawn.

It's the anti-human anti-planet movement, care of the most evil company in the world

the ones that brought us PCB's, Dioxin, and agent orange

the sh*tstains on the face of the planet....Monsanto

[era veteran]

41. Don't forget DDT

Monsato the Evil Empire

[bvar22]

8. AND

Offshore Drilling is now perfectly safe!

The potential for global disaster with GM seeds is small, but it DOES exist.
Without independent strict oversight and long term testing, it WILL happen....only a matter of time.
This is NOT an area where "Plant NOW, Test later" is a good idea.

My wife and I feel so strongly about this issue, combined with the general contamination and corruption of the Factory Food Production and Delivery system,
that we moved to The Woods and started growing our own food.

[marmar]

9. 7-2? Wow. ...... It's not even the usual 5-4 corporate fascist majority.

nt

[Karmadillo]

10. Inverted totalitarianism?

nt

[SpiralHawk]

11. Corporate media ain't telling the full story here. Who really won this case?

"It depends on who you listen to.

"According to the New York Times, this was a clear win for Monsanto. And, worse, it was a 7 to 1 vote.

"But the Center for Food Safety says otherwise. In the decision, it is STILL illegal to plant Roundup Ready Alfalfa until the USDA deregulates it (again).

"And, if they want to deregulate it (and they do), they must complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)."

That's a requirement common sense people have wanted all along, and now the court has backed it...a requirement that Monsanto avidly wished to avoid. A real, accurate, impartial Environmental Impact Statement will not bring out the kinds of 'results' that come from their corporate-funded so-called 'scientists.' It's going to show the development of mutant SuperWeeds, and Mutant life-forms in the soil. Never mind the eventual development of mutant people -- Generation M.

http://www.lavidalocavore.org/diary/3706/the-supreme-court-decision-on-monsantos-ge-alfalfa-who-won

[SpiralHawk]

14. "The Court further recognized....

From the same link as above:

"The Court further recognized that the threat of transgenic contamination is harmful and onerous to organic and conventional farmers and that the injury allows them to challenge future biotech crop commercializations in court..."

HUGE. Up till now the GMO mutant corporations have been able to spew their mutant spawn hither and yon, willy nilly, and force people to just EAT IT, the way the fish and the human beings in the Gulf are being forced to EAT BP's massive oil emissions.

This Supreme Court ruling at least gives people a chance to fight back against massive corporate GMO mutant pollution. That's HUGE.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

17. Once the (possible) damage is done.

[SpiralHawk]

19. I'm totally with you, Ommie ...but

we must appreciate the legal bits that come our way. They may in time help form a legal basis for halting the unwelcome, treacherous, and occult global onslaught of mutant seeds and mutant food.

Hopefully before too much more damage is done...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

23. I hope you're right Hawk. I cannot stand this assault of the earth and living things.

My heart keeps breaking.

[boppers]

37. All people already are mutants.

Not to stomp on your rant, but mutation is part of how evolution *works*.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

13. BBC got it wrong. 7-1. Justice John Paul Stevens was the lone dissenter

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/business/22bizcourt.html?src=busln

[boppers]

38. Snively? Really?

"Still, David F. Snively, Monsanto’s general counsel, called the decision a significant victory. "

You can't make this stuff up.

[amborin]

25. K&R

[Nikki Stone1]

29. It's about control of the food supply.

And control of Mother Nature.

And Nibelungen.

[proverbialwisdom]

33. Read this site: http://gmwatch.org/

Here's the best clearinghouse for information on biotech foods: http://gmwatch.org/

The two articles they cite are contained here:

http://www.gmwatch.eu/latest-listing/1-news-items/12302-supreme-courts-ruling-on-monsantos-gm-alfalfa

http://truefoodnow.org/2010/06/21/supreme-court-ruling-in-monsanto-case-is-victory-for-center-for-food-safety-farmers/
Supreme Court Ruling in Monsanto Case is Victory for Center for Food Safety, Farmers
Center for Food Safety, June 21 2010

and

http://civileats.com/2010/06/21/supreme-court%e2%80%99s-ruling-on-monsanto%e2%80%99s-ge-alfalfa-who-won/
Supreme Court's Ruling on Monsanto’s GE Alfalfa: Who Won?
Tom Laskawy
Grist, June 21st 2010


Also, see

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kimbrell/supreme-court-case-a-defe_b_620087.html?ref=twitter
Supreme Court Case a Defeat for Monsanto's Ambitions
By Andrew Kimbrell
Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety
Posted: June 21, 2010 05:09 PM

[Kalun D]

35. OOOHHHH NOOOOO!!

Sotomayor disappoints

votes for the dark side

[TheKentuckian]

39. Here is a fine example of why the 5-4 logic is flawed and it matters

who is appointed to the court beyond how they can be expected to rule in cases with that sort of split.

More is decided than Roe and Citizens United. There is a dire need to place liberal jurist on the bench who can do better than siding with the corporations unless they have egregious over reaches.

[earth mom]

40. Lets's see, BP poisoned the ocean and Monsanto poisoned the land

so how many people and animals are gonna be alive on this planet in 50 or 100 years after those fuckers destroy the place?! :grr:

[spanone]

42. thank god the supreme court is looking out for the best interests of monsanto

:sarcasm: