We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Privacy Terms and Cookie Policy
Shining Light on Farm & Food Policy for 20 Years.
Tuesday, November 19, 2024
The Supreme Court’s decision to allow California’s animal housing law to remain in place caused a furor in the pork industry and among farm-state lawmakers, who vowed to introduce legislation to overturn the ruling. But the ruling's impact also may be felt in the 25 other states that allow voters to craft laws through ballot initiatives.
The Supreme Court has rejected the arguments of hog farmers that California’s Proposition 12, which bans the sales of pork coming from sows confined in gestation crates, violates the Constitution's Commerce Clause.
Supreme Court justices peppered attorneys with questions Tuesday over the constitutionality of a California animal housing law that agricultural interests say would have nationwide impacts.
A second big Supreme Court case for agriculture is coming up next week, this one involving California’s Proposition 12 requirements for animal housing.
The National Pork Producers Council and American Farm Bureau Federation got a boost in their Supreme Court challenge to California’s animal housing law, Proposition 12, with the U.S. government’s filing of a brief supporting the groups.
The Supreme Court will review the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 12, an animal housing law that requires pork sold in the state come from sows afforded a minimum amount of space.
California recently added to its no-travel list. There are now 17 states California officials are forbidden to travel on state business because those states have laws that don’t pass muster in the eyes of California’s ever vigilant hall monitors. In two initiatives passed by California voters in 2008 and 2018, California has placed restrictions on out-of-state producers of agricultural products, barring the import of animal products produced in facilities that don’t meet California’s requirements on animal housing.
A federal appeals court has rejected an attempt by meat processors to block implementation of a California animal housing law approved by voters in 2018.
