The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a challenge to a California animal cruelty law that affects the pork industry, ruling that the case was properly dismissed by lower courts. Pork producers had said that the law could force industry-wide changes and raise the cost of bacon and other pork products nationwide.
U.S. Senator from Kansas, Dr. Roger Marshall, released the following statement after the ruling:
“I’m disappointed the Supreme Court did not strike down California’s Proposition 12, we simply can’t allow radical state laws to dictate the agricultural practices of the rest of the nation, especially in a way that will only increase food costs for the food insecure and drive farmers and ranchers out of business. I will be re-introducing my Exposing Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act to prohibit state and local governments from interfering with the production or manufacture of agricultural products in other states."
More than 20 states challenged California’s Prop. 12 which requires that meat products raised outside the state conform to animal rights standards adopted by California. On appeal the Supreme Court denied cert of this initial case. Shortly thereafter the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a separate pork industry lawsuit against Prop. 12; the Supreme Court took up the separate lawsuit but ultimately sided with California and upheld Proposition 12 in its recent decision. Several other states have adopted or contemplated laws that would impact the agricultural production outside their states.
During the previous Congress, Senators Marshall, Chuck Grassley (IA), Joni Ernst (IA), John Cornyn (TX), and Cindy Hyde-Smith (MS) introduced the EATS Act.