Setback for Gene Edited Crop Regulations

Federal Judge Reinstates Old GE Crop Regulations

U.S. District Judge James Donato has issued a summary judgment that critics say sets back agricultural innovation by decades.

The judgment, issued last December in the case of National Family Farm Coalition v. Vilsack, challenges the progress made under the 2020 SECURE rule by reinstating older, process-focused regulations for genetically engineered (GE) crops.

This ruling impacts the regulatory approach towards newer molecular GE techniques, like CRISPR, which have been recognized for their precision and potential benefits in agriculture.

Previously, the SECURE rule had shifted regulatory oversight to focus more on the product's risk rather than the method of its creation, a move supported by decades of scientific research and innovation.

Judge Donato's decision to vacate the SECURE rule means that GE crops will once again have to undergo the older regulatory process, increasing the cost and time involved in bringing new plant varieties to market.

The scientific community has long argued that the risks associated with GE crops are no different from those of traditionally bred crops. The National Academy of Sciences and the National Research Council have both supported this view, stating that the focus should be on the product rather than the process.

This ruling not only represents a significant step backward in terms of regulatory philosophy but also poses a barrier to innovation in a field that is critical for the future of food security and environmental sustainability. 

The agricultural sector now faces increased uncertainty as it awaits further legal developments or potential new regulations from APHIS.