SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Legal Newsline) – California is trying to impose its own animal-confinement agenda on farmers in the rest of the country, says a group of attorneys general of 15 states.
In March, those AGs - 14 Republicans and one Democrat - filed an amicus brief in a lawsuit that challenges Proposition 12, which passed in California in November 2018 and forbids the sale of meat and eggs from animals that were housed under certain restrictions.
The lawsuit was filed by the National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau Federation, who now have the support of the Republican AGs as they argue against the “extraterritorial reach” of Prop 12.
This reach is embodied in the measure prohibiting the in-state sale of any veal, pork or eggs produced from out-of-state animals, the AGs say.
“(T)he Commerce Clause prohibits California’s attempt to usurp other states’ authority to set their own animal-husbandry policies,” their brief says.
“California’s regulations are a substantial departure from current practices in most states, including amici states; the Commerce Clause does not permit California to upset those practices by setting a single, nationwide animal-confinement policy.”
Prop 12 forces farmers to adhere to its regulations or be shut out of the California market, the AGs say. The rule is designed to allow more space for pigs, veal calves and hens.
California has filed a motion to dismiss and intervenors who are animal rights groups are asking for judgment on the pleadings – moves opposed by the AGs.
The intervenors say this lawsuit is a copycat of an earlier one that failed and is now on appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, said the same in his motion.
“Plaintiffs claim that Proposition 12’s standards for pork products that are sold in California violate the dormant Commerce Clause by regulating the conduct of pork producers extraterritorially and unduly burdening interstate commerce. That is wrong,” his motion to dismiss says.
“Proposition 12 is constitutional because it applies uniformly to all pork sales in California—and only to sales in California—and because it does not impose a substantial burden on interstate commerce. Plaintiffs have not stated a cognizable claim.”
The AGs worry about a web of conflicting state laws slowing interstate commerce, noting similar laws being passed in Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan and Rhode Island.
These laws require farmers to make sure an animal can lie down, stand up, turn around and fully extend its limbs.
The Republican AGs signing the amicus brief represent the states of Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. Democrat Tom Miller of Iowa also signed the brief.
From Legal Newsline: Reach editor John O’Brien at john.obrien@therecordinc.com.