Pork industry takes fight over California law to U.S. Supreme Court
Send a link to a friend
[October 10, 2022] By
Leah Douglas
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme
Court is set to hear arguments on Tuesday in an industry challenge to
the constitutionality of a California animal welfare law in a case that
could undermine the power of states to regulate a range of issues within
their own borders.
The National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau
Federation are appealing a lower court's decision to throw out their
lawsuit seeking to invalidate a 2018 ballot initiative passed by voters
barring sales in California of pork, veal and eggs from animals whose
confinement failed to meet minimum space requirements.
The pork industry has defended the size of the cages used at pig farms
as humane and necessary for animal safety. Animal rights groups have
said some pork producers confine mother pigs in cages so small the
animals cannot turn around for most of their lives.
The industry groups have argued that the measure, called Proposition 12,
violates a provision of the U.S. Constitution known as the Commerce
Clause, which gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce,
by requiring out-of-state producers to comply or face a California sales
ban. A legal doctrine called the "dormant" Commerce Clause bars states
from passing laws discriminating against commerce in other states.
Proposition 12 violates that doctrine, the pork producers argued in a
legal filing, because it would increase costs for pig farmers, nearly
all of whom are located outside California. While being the most
populous U.S. state and an important market, California produces just
0.1% of the nation's pork.
"If you're looking for an example of an unconstitutional law, this is
it," said Michael Formica, chief legal strategist for the pork
producers.
Proponents of the law disagree, saying California has the right to set
standards for products sold to its consumers regardless of where these
are produced.
"There's a long history of state laws that have to do with protecting
public health, food safety and animal welfare," said Josh Balk, vice
president of farm animal protection at the Humane Society of the United
States, which led the campaign to pass Proposition 12 and is a party in
the case. "Producers have a choice if they want to sell products within
the state's borders that meet that standard."
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a
district court's decision to throw out the lawsuit, finding no Commerce
Clause violation.
President Joe Biden's administration has sided with the pork producers,
saying in a Supreme Court brief that states cannot ban products "that
pose no threat to public health or safety based on philosophical
objections."
'DRAMATIC EXPANSION'
A ruling by the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority,
favoring the pork industry would have major implications for Commerce
Clause interpretation, according to some legal experts.
[to top of second column] |
Young pigs feed in a pen during a hog
farm tour in Ryan, Iowa, U.S., May 18, 2019. REUTERS/Ben Brewer/File
Photo
The industry is "asking for a dramatic expansion of the doctrine in
a way that would call into question all kinds of state laws," lawyer
Brian Frazelle of the Constitutional Accountability Center liberal
advocacy group, which filed a brief in the case on behalf of law
professors, told reporters in a conference call.
Sixteen liberal U.S. senators, including both of California's, had
urged Biden's administration to back the law. They wrote that a
ruling endorsing the industry's Commerce Clause position "could
allow large, multi-state corporations to evade numerous state laws
that focus on harms to their constituents, including those
addressing wildlife trafficking, climate change, renewable energy,
stolen property trafficking and labor abuses."
A group of 20 primarily Republican-governed states led by Indiana
said in a brief that upholding Proposition 12 would undermine state
sovereignty. Another group of 14 primarily Democratic-governed
states and the District of Columbia, led by Illinois, said
overturning it would undermine state authority to legislate.
A ruling favoring pork producers could inspire more industry
challenges to state regulations, according to Nandan Joshi, an
attorney with the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, which
filed a brief supporting California.
Pressed by animal welfare and consumer groups, many food and
restaurant companies already have committed to phasing out small
confinements for pigs and to buying or producing cage-free eggs.
Proposition 12, passed with the support of about 63% of California
voters, set the required space for breeding pigs, or sows, at 24
square feet (2.2 square meters). The current industry standard is
between 14 and 20 square feet (1.3 to 1.9 square meters), according
to a 2021 report from Dutch banking and financial services company
Rabobank.
The measure also increased the space required to house egg-laying
hens and calves raised for veal.
Top U.S. pork producer Smithfield Foods, owned by Chinese company WH
Group Ltd, said last year it plans to comply with the law.
Kansas-based Seaboard Foods, the No. 2 U.S. pork producer, said this
year it is was converting some of its production to achieve
compliance.
(Reporting by Leah Douglas; Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2022 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |