The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has left the registration of sulfoxaflor intact but given the Environmental Protection Agency a short timeline to assess the insecticide’s impact on endangered species.

Ruling in a lawsuit brought by environmental groups and beekeepers, the court said part of the reason it was allowing continued use of sulfoxaflor is because it “has a more favorable toxicological profile compared to alternatives.” The court also said that vacating the registration “would disrupt many agricultural sectors,” which could result in lower yields.

But the court also criticized EPA for “engaging in a whack-a-mole strategy for complying” with the Endangered Species Act. It “does little to comply with the law and then devotes resources once it has been sued – and then this process repeats itself. Parties should not have to file a lawsuit to compel EPA to follow the law.”

“EPA admits it did not comply with the ESA but defends itself by claiming that it lacks the resources to do so,” the court continued. However, “EPA cannot flout the will of Congress – and of the people – just because it thinks it is too busy or understaffed.”

The court said it was “reluctantly” remanding the registration to EPA without vacating it, so EPA can make its ecological effects determination, solicit comment on Corteva’s sulfoxaflor amendments, and address the economic impact on beekeepers.