Case: In Re Environmental Working Group
26-01094 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Filed Date: April 21, 2026
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
Case Summary
This case challenges the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) failure to act on a formal administrative petition that provided evidence that glyphosate, the most widely used herbicide in the United States and globally, is being exposed to children through food.
On April 21, 2026, Environmental Working Group (EWG) filed this petition for writ of mandamus in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit against the EPA. EWG is a nonprofit, nonpartisan group that specializes in research and advocacy in the areas of agricultural subsidies, toxic chemicals, drinking water pollutants, and corporate accountability. In September 2018, EWG filed a formal administrative petition with the EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), asking the EPA to revoke the glyphosate tolerance for oats and restrict the use of glyphosate as a pre-harvest desiccant. The EPA accepted the petition for review, published it for public comment, and received substantial public input. In January 2020, the EPA expressly recognized the petition in its Interim Registration Review Decision but made clear that the decision “d[id]s not constitute EPA’s response” to EWG’s petition. Instead, the EPA stated that it anticipated issuing a response at a later time in 2020, though no decision ever came. In 2022, in litigation challenging EPA’s Interim Decision, the Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded the human health portion of the decision, holding that EPA’s conclusion regarding cancer risk was not supported by substantial evidence and that EPA had violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to make the required effects determinations. Following that decision, the EPA withdrew the Interim Decision and confirmed that it had not resolved the Petition. The EPA stated that it intended to respond to the Petition “before issuing a final registration review decision for glyphosate” and that it anticipated issuing that final registration review decision in 2026. EWG sought a writ of mandamus, or an order compelling agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because the EPA unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed action on EWG’s petition.
The case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Zahra Jamil (6/25/2026)
Ian Gibson (8/4/2026)
People
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73238668/parties/in-re-environmental-working-group/
Leary, Caroline (District of Columbia)
Martinez, Rachel Dorothy (District of Columbia)
Documents in the Clearinghouse
Docket
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73238668/in-re-environmental-working-group/
Last updated Aug. 30, 2026, 3:17 a.m.
Docket for: In re: Environmental Working Group
Case Details
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: April 21, 2026
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan group that specializes in research and advocacy in the areas of agricultural subsidies, toxic chemicals, drinking water pollutants, and corporate accountability.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Other Dockets:
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 26-01094
Special Case Type(s):
Appellate Court is initial court
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Environmental Justice and Resources:
Environmental Impact Statements
Case Summary of In Re Environmental Working Group, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/48130/ (last updated 8/4/2026).