Matt England, president and CEO of Triumph Foods, is thrilled on the progress a federal judge’s ruling has brought for the pork industry, but he says it’s more meaningful than just pigs and pork chops.
On Monday U.S. District Judge William Young of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled an exemption to Massachusetts Question 3 as unconstitutional, but said it can be severed to allow the rest of the measure to survive an industry-backed legal challenge, for now, Reuters reports. The ruling came in a lawsuit by Triumph Foods and out-of-state pig farmers who argued the restrictions violated the U.S. Constitution.
The exemption made it possible for pork produced at federally inspected facilities in Massachusetts to be purchased if buyers could take possession of the pork on-site at the plants instead of grocery stores or retail locations. According to the decision, three pork processing plants fell under this exemption in Massachusetts.
Young ruled the exemption violated the Commerce Clause by discriminating against out-of-state pork processors like Triumph.
“The USDA has consistently ensured that Americans have access to the safest food products in the world, and this process should not be infringed by individual state laws, as food offerings should be driven by consumer choices,” England says. “We look forward to demonstrating how the remaining portion of the law intrudes into the federal government’s role, and are hopeful the disruption to the country’s supply chain soon comes to an end.”
The judge opened the door to Triumph further challenging the overall law, saying he would allow the company to reassert a previously-dismissed claim that the Federal Meat Inspection Act preempts the state’s act, Reuters reports.
Triumph Foods says that without the exemption, the act will conflict with the federal inspection law by creating additional, different requirements on how pigs are to be handled than the federal law provided.
Read more:
