The U.S. Supreme Court’s review of Monsanto v. Durnell is not about re-litigating the science of glyphosate. It is about who decides what appears on a federally regulated product label. Our latest analysis examines the oral argument, the legal path before the Court, and why the case could have implications far beyond one herbicide.

Inside the Farm Bill, Section 12006 addresses when state agricultural standards can extend beyond state borders through interstate commerce. The provision does not limit in-state regulation. It clarifies how Congress may protect national food markets from conflicting state-by-state production mandates.

Many policymakers now believe America's children are facing a widespread, systemic health crisis. That belief appears in federal commission reports, congressional testimony and media coverage. Taken at face value, and without context, it has begun driving debate over the farm bill and broader agricultural policy on the conviction that the food system is failing children's health.

The data tell a more complicated story.

The current debate in Congress is not about overriding California’s voters (“China-backed Big Pork wants to override 63% of California voters. Even conservatives are mad,” March 12). It is about Congress exercising the authority expressly assigned to it in the Constitution when state rules reshape interstate commerce.

A dispute over Dietary Guidelines isn’t about hidden conflicts — it’s about an effort to turn transparency into a disqualifier.

When a single state’s sales conditions reshape farming decisions nationwide, federalism enters new terrain. The question is whether interstate commerce is governed by Congress or by market power.

How pork prices in Hawaii, California, and Utah show what happens when regulation adds distance to the grocery aisle.

Affordability is measured by whether families can keep food on the table week after week without falling behind elsewhere. It depends on scale, stability, and the freedom to choose.

Why food and farming depend on practical decisions, not hazard absolutism

The growing risks of allowing individual states to govern production beyond their borders.

An initiative focused on affordability, access, and evidence in food and agriculture policy.