The North Carolina Senate approved the 2025 Farm Act on June 17 by a 31-14 vote, despite a controversial provision concerning the labeling of pesticides.
Before the floor vote, key amendments were adopted that target crop-theft penalties, utility-line safety studies, and wastewater-management practices.
A previous draft of SB 639 initiated a study on raw milk herd-share systems and banned labeling raw milk as “pet milk,” which lawmakers dubbed the “milk loophole.” These controversial provisions were removed from the legislation. The sale of raw milk for human consumption is illegal in North Carolina; labeling it as “pet milk” or not for human consumption is a common workaround often utilized to sell raw milk legally.
Another point of contention in the bill is Section 19, which allows for pesticide manufacturers to be protected from liability as long as their product has a label approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
This stems from a pending Supreme Court case in which Monsanto, a subsidiary of Bayer, is being sued for failing to warn consumers that Roundup contains glyphosate, which can cause cancer. However, under FIFRA, pesticide companies cannot change warning labels on products without EPA approval first.
“If you respect crop protection tools, the rule of law, and an efficient food system, there’s only one right answer here,” said Ray Starling, general counsel for NC Chamber, in his analysis. “Nobody calls their lawyer when they’re hungry.”
The NC Chamber supports Section 19, arguing that the clause protects the food supply, manufacturers, and families.
“Without this provision, North Carolina is opening a pathway for companies to be targeted by plaintiffs’ attorneys for simply complying with federal law. The rigor of EPA requirements cannot be overstated, attempts to add a state-level of regulation to that process will increase lawsuits and bigger pockets for plaintiffs’ attorneys, but it will not do anything for farmer safety.”
NC Chamber
Experts argue that such protections for industry leaders undermine free market checks and balances and consumers’ impact on market winners and losers.
“This to me is an alarming example of corporate lobbying skewing policy in favor of industry giants,” Kelly Lester, policy analyst for the Center for Food, Power and Life at the John Locke Foundation, told the Carolina Journal. “By shielding these companies from accountability, the state disrupts the natural checks and balances of a free market, where consumers and courts should help determine winners and losers based on merit, safety, and responsibility. Such carve-outs undermine both public trust and the principles of fair competition.”
After passing in the Senate, SB 639 was sent to the House by special message. On June 18, it passed the first reading and was sent to the House Rules Committee.
Editor’s Note: A previous version of this article did not note the removal of the raw milk provision.