Tiberius Posted October 5, 2022 Posted October 5, 2022 supreme court to hear a challenge to this law https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22576044/prop-12-california-eggs-pork-bacon-veal-animal-welfare-law-gestation-crates-battery-cages In 2018, California voters passed Prop 12, a ballot initiative that is the nation’s — and some say the world’s — strongest law to improve living conditions for farmed animals. It seems modest on its face: Some of the animals raised for consumption in California must be given additional space. But once fully implemented on January 1, 2022, it will affect nearly a million pigs and 40 million egg-laying hens each year. Currently in the US, most female breeding pigs — or sows — are confined in gestation crates, metal enclosures so small the pigs can’t turn around for virtually their entire lives, while most egg-laying hens are crammed into battery cages that restrict them from even fully opening their wings for 18 months. Under Prop 12, these practices will be illegal. (A part of Prop 12 that covers veal went into effect at the start of 2020.) But the impact of Prop 12 won’t be restricted to the Golden State. It will also be felt by pork and egg producers across the country who will have to retrofit existing barns and/or build new ones to comply — a costly and complex transition — if they want to continue to sell to California, which consumes about 15 percent of the nation’s pork and 12 percent of the nation’s eggs and veal. https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/03/justices-add-three-new-cases-including-challenge-to-animal-welfare-law-and-warhol-copyright-dispute/ The justices granted review in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, a case arising from a challenge to a California law that makes the sale of pork in California contingent on compliance with conditions that virtually no existing commercial farms meet – specifically, that the pig from which the pork derives was born to a sow who was housed in a 24-square-foot space and could turn around freely without touching any barriers. Trade associations representing the pork industry and farmers went to court, alleging that the law violates the “dormant” commerce component of the Constitution’s commerce clause by (among other things) regulating commerce that is almost entirely outside of California, which imports over 99% of its pork. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit agreed with the challengers that the law would “require pervasive changes to the pork production industry nationwide,” but it ruled that the challengers had failed to make out a claim for a violation of the commerce clause. The justices will review that decision. 1
SoCal Deek Posted October 5, 2022 Posted October 5, 2022 This was an interesting ballot measure out here. (We have a few of them each election season.). This particular one was advertised to the public as a means of reducing cruelty to animals. It was only after it passed that the public found out that it would virtually eliminate bacon in the State of California. I’m not the least bit surprised that it’s being challenged. 1
Recommended Posts