Why MAHA Supporters Are Angry: The Executive Order on Glyphosate

On February 18, 2026, President Trump issued an executive order that invoked the Defense Production Act and delegated powers to the Secretary of Agriculture to prioritize materials the administration called essential to national defense; Section 3 of the order explicitly confers immunity for domestic producers who comply with orders. The measure was framed as a step to secure supply chains, but it has been criticized by public health advocates who argue that legal protections could shield manufacturers from liability.

The White House emphasized elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides as central to military readiness and food production, noting that the United States currently has only a single domestic producer of those inputs and imports millions of kilograms each year. While the administration maintains that increased domestic production will protect American families, opponents counter that the policy risks prioritizing corporate continuity over long-term health.

The decision followed Bayer’s proposed $7.25 billion settlement of Roundup litigation on February 17, 2026, and the complex legal landscape includes a pending Supreme Court appeal over whether federal approvals can preempt state lawsuits. If the court rules for Bayer, many claims could be limited; nevertheless, the company has faced tens of thousands of suits alleging cancer risk from glyphosate.

MAHA, which stands for Make America Healthy Again and is associated with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has been reshaping discussions about pesticides and food policy. Many parents who supported MAHA are now expressing disappointment, and this split could influence voter behavior if organizers withdraw support; consequently, political allies say the administration must navigate health concerns and agricultural needs carefully to retain trust.