WASHINGTON — Corteva Agriscience will cancel its Enlist Duo herbicide following years of legal pressure from advocacy groups, marking a significant development for the agricultural chemicals sector and raising broader questions about pesticide regulation and environmental risk.
The decision follows prolonged litigation led by the Center for Food Safety (CFS), which challenged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s approval of the product. Enlist Duo combines glyphosate and 2,4-D, two widely used herbicides that have faced scrutiny over potential links to cancer and environmental harm.
Corteva’s move to withdraw the product comes as legal proceedings were ongoing, with advocates arguing the approval process failed to adequately assess risks to human health and ecosystems.
“This is a monumental win for people and the planet,” said Kristina Sinclair, staff attorney at CFS. “After over a decade of legal battles, and rather than try and rebut our arguments in court, the manufacturer pulled Enlist Duo from the market. Persistent public-interest litigation works. Our food system never should have been doused in this toxic cocktail and now never will be again.”
Enlist Duo was first approved in 2014 and marketed as part of a broader seed and chemical system designed to address weed resistance. Corteva, which emerged from the breakup of DowDuPont, positioned the product as a successor to earlier herbicide systems developed by companies such as Monsanto.
Advocacy organizations and farmworker groups, however, have long argued the product posed unacceptable risks.
“This victory is a long-overdue step toward justice for farmworker women and rural communities who have borne the brunt of pesticide exposure for far too long,” said Mily Treviño-Sauceda, Executive Director of Alianza Nacional de Campesinas. “For years, Enlist herbicides have put our families at risk—causing reproductive harm, cancer, and devastating community health impacts. Today’s decision to cancel Enlist Duo proves that people power works, and that protecting the health of women, children, and farmworkers must always come before corporate profit.”
CFS first challenged Enlist Duo’s approval in 2015, arguing the EPA failed to meet its legal obligations under federal pesticide law to ensure the product would not cause unreasonable environmental harm. Court decisions and regulatory reviews over the following decade forced the agency to revisit aspects of its assessment, including impacts on monarch butterfly habitats.
“CFS has been in this fight since day one,” said Amy van Saun, senior attorney at CFS. “For more than a decade, we’ve challenged the revolving door between pesticide corporations and their regulators. This cancellation is the result of our relentless watchdogging, evidence-based advocacy, and the power of communities refusing to back down.”
Farmers and industry observers say the cancellation could have ripple effects across agricultural markets, particularly for growers who adopted herbicide-tolerant crop systems tied to specific chemical products.
“This decision finally acknowledges what farmers and communities have been saying for years—that Enlist Duo’s harm far outweighs its supposed benefits,” said Rob Faux, Iowa farmer and Communications Manager for Pesticide Action and Agroecology Network. “Enlist Duo is a product that drifts from its target, damaging both alternative crops and threatening health. Our food systems should not be collateral damage to corporate chemical profits.”
The cancellation adds to increasing regulatory and legal scrutiny facing major agrochemical companies, including Bayer, which acquired Monsanto and has faced litigation related to glyphosate products.
CFS said the decision reflects broader efforts to hold regulators accountable.
“No one watchdogs EPA and its pesticide decisions as closely as CFS, or holds the agency to account when it violates pesticide law,” said Bill Freese, science director at Center for Food Safety.
Despite the cancellation, legal disputes over related products continue. CFS confirmed litigation is ongoing against Corteva’s Enlist One herbicide, which contains 2,4-D alone.
Advocates say the outcome underscores the role of legal challenges in shaping pesticide policy, while industry participants are likely to face increased pressure to demonstrate product safety amid growing public and regulatory scrutiny.
“Every cancellation, every court win, every shift in public policy is the result of unwavering dedication,” added Sinclair. “Today’s victory is a reminder that persistence works—and that together, we can end the toxic pesticide era.”