atr a – The Trump administration, through a court-ordered review finalized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, found that atrazine is not likely to jeopardize threatened or endangered species or harm critical habitats. The decision has triggered outrage among Make
For years, atrazine has carried more than the weight of a herbicide—its name has become shorthand in an ongoing fight over what should be allowed in the nation’s water and fields.
On Friday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finalized a court-ordered review of the chemical, clearing the way for it to continue being used. The findings sharply contradict conclusions drawn in 2021 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer. The decision immediately set off outrage among Make America Healthy Again. or MAHA. supporters. who have long called for banning atrazine and say the Trump administration is brushing off risks to wildlife and people.
The atrazine debate also has a political afterlife tied to Alex Jones. a conspiracy theorist whose claims about frogs’ gender and sexuality were fueled by research on endocrine disruption. Even though no research confirms a cause-and-effect link between atrazine and “frog gender” changes. the story has become a cultural flashpoint—one that MAHA and other conservative health advocates now say is being treated like it doesn’t matter.
The Fish and Wildlife Service review came after a legal challenge by the Center for Biological Diversity. The agency said its review does not find an extinction risk from the registration being considered.
“ We found that the proposed registration that is being reviewed for atrazine is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species in this consultation,” the review said.
The review added that while the agency expects that. for “many species. a small number of individuals are likely to experience reduced growth. reproduction. or food availability. ” it does not anticipate “species-level adverse effects.” It concluded it believes “the registration of atrazine is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of these species.”.
On habitat, the agency said it found “the proposed registration of atrazine is not likely to destroy or adversely modify any proposed or designated critical habitats.”
Those findings have collided with what other agencies and scientists have previously said about atrazine’s potential harms. In late 2025. the IARC determined that atrazine was “probably carcinogenic to humans.” In 2021. the EPA said atrazine harms more than 1. 000 of the nation’s most endangered plants and animals.
Environmental advocates say the court-ordered review’s conclusion does not match the broader body of evidence.
Nathan Donley, the Center for Biological Diversity’s environmental health science director, said: “The science shows that atrazine should be banned here, just as it has been in dozens of other countries, but Trump officials keep shrugging off the danger to both wildlife and humans.”
He continued: “Instead of taking the environmental and health risks of atrazine seriously, the Trump administration has once again done the pesticide industry’s bidding, allowing this extraordinarily dangerous pesticide to continue poisoning our land and water for decades to come.”
Atrazine is an herbicide widely used to kill weeds, mostly on farms, and it is applied to crops including sugarcane, corn, pineapples, sorghum and macadamia nuts. It is also used on evergreen tree farms and for evergreen forest regrowth.
Despite its widespread use in the United States, atrazine is banned in more than 60 countries, and studies have found links between exposure to the herbicide and birth defects, multiple cancers, and fertility problems such as low sperm quality and irregular menstrual cycles.
The controversy is not just regulatory—it is personal for the people who have built their public fights around it.
After the review’s release, MAHA supporters took to X to respond, arguing that the government is reversing science and undermining the health-focused agenda they have championed.
Influential MAHA activist Alex Clark, who hosts a podcast for the conservative political group Turning Point USA, wrote: “We are running one of the largest uncontrolled chemical experiments in human history from an alleged ‘MAHA EPA’. We are being lied to.”
Vani Hari. another leading MAHA activist who has advised the Trump administration on food policy. posted: “Atrazine is banned in over 60 countries because it’s linked to reproductive dysfunction. developmental issues. and probable cancer risks. The EPA just reversed a science determination in 2021 that the herbicide was likely to harm more than 1. 000 protected species – saying now it poses no risk. WTF.”.
For HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the timing is especially fraught. Kennedy previously called for a ban on atrazine, and MAHA supporters have framed their movement as wary of pesticide use.
Now they are challenging a decision that, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service review, does not pose an extinction risk to threatened or endangered animals or plants.
The atrazine “frog gender” debate traces back to a 2010 study by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. which reported that 10 percent of exposed genetic males developed into fully functional females able to breed with males and produce viable eggs. That study suggested the effect could be related to endocrine disruption. and the researchers exposed frogs to levels of atrazine below concentrations found in surface and well water.
That research helped fuel Alex Jones’ assertions that chemicals in U.S. water systems could change frogs’ gender and sexuality—a theory that took off in 2015.
But the science has been contested. Other studies have found endocrine disruption to a smaller degree, and scientists have argued there is not a clear causal link between atrazine exposure and the frog changes described in the earlier work.
Kenney has also been pressed to reconcile MAHA’s health-first message with an administration that, in parallel, is expanding pesticide access for farmers.
The Trump administration has increasingly pursued an “America-first” approach to help secure the domestic food supply by allowing greater access to pesticides. Kennedy was put in a similar position earlier in the debate over glyphosate. the key ingredient in Roundup. one of the most widely used herbicides in the United States.
In February, Trump signed an executive order that would push for a greater supply of glyphosate-based herbicides. In that order. Trump said the chemicals play “a critical role” in American farming and that a lack of access would “critically jeopardize agricultural productivity” and the country’s food systems.
Monsanto is facing billions in exposure for potential carcinogenic side effects associated with long-term exposure to glyphosate.
With atrazine now cleared in a court-ordered review, the dispute is broadening again—pitting an administration focused on agricultural access against a political coalition centered on reducing chemical risks.
In this case, the fight is not only about which agency findings prevail. It is also about what kind of health and environment agenda can survive inside a government that is steering regulation in opposite directions at the same time.
The latest update leaves Kennedy in the middle of another pesticide showdown, while MAHA supporters have made clear they see the review as a sign that their concerns are being ignored.
atr a zine pesticide MAHA Robert F. Kennedy Jr. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Center for Biological Diversity Alex Jones frog gender debate IARC EPA glyphosate Roundup