The pork industry is still waiting to see if the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will take the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and American Farm Bureau Federation’s (AFBF) case against California’s Proposition 12. On Friday, Feb. 18, SCOTUS reviewed cases. However, as of Tuesday morning, NPPC found out SCOTUS has not chosen to take up or deny their petition. The petition has now been relisted for Friday, Feb. 25, for further consideration.
“While that is a good sign, the reality is this case is incredibly important, not just to the pork industry, but to all of agriculture and to our consumers,” Bryan Humphreys, NPPC CEO, said at the Illinois Pork Expo.
Continuing down the path of state-by-state mandates is a threat to the entire U.S. economy, he said. Because of that, clarification from SCOTUS is critical.
“What’s intriguing about this is they see value in the case, or they would have denied it,” he said. “We just need them to get over that threshold and hear the case, understand the issues and to find this for all of agriculture.”
The next conference will take place on Friday, Humphreys said. A decision will be announced Monday, Feb. 28 if SCOTUS will hear or deny the case. The case could continue to be relisted.
NPPC and AFBF are petitioning the Supreme Court to consider the constitutionality of one state imposing regulations that reach far outside its borders and stifle interstate and international commerce. And, in this case, it’s about arbitrary animal housing standards that lack any scientific, technical or agricultural basis and that will only inflict harm on U.S. hog farmers, NPPC reports.
However, NPPC said that precedent runs counter to numerous Supreme Court decisions and conflicts with nearly every other federal circuit court. The Commerce Clause typically grants Congress the power to regulate trade among the states and restricts states from regulating commerce outside their borders, except for matters related to public health and safety.
“This is about Proposition 12. That’s where the case was filed. That’s what brought it to our petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, but this is bigger than just Prop 12. This is about Question Three in Massachusetts. This is about the PAUSE Act in Colorado,” Humphreys said. “This is about establishing interstate and dormant state commerce clauses for all of agriculture.”
This case has jurisdiction to determine sow housing and animal welfare practices and environmental practices across state lines, he added.
“This is important to the pork industry today, but it is broader than just Proposition 12,” he said. “And that’s why we need the U.S. Supreme Court to step in here and solidify this issue one way or the other.”
In January, the Food Equity Alliance brought forward a case in California. The Sacramento County Superior Court ruled to delay enforcement of Proposition 12 for pork retailers, including grocers, for 180 days once final rules are in place.
Zippy Duvall, AFBF president, said in a release that the Sacramento County Superior Court’s decision points to another example of inherent flaws in Proposition 12.
“Besides putting unfair pressure on retailers, it takes away farmers’ flexibility to ensure hogs are raised in a safe environment. Small farms across the country will be forced to make expensive and unnecessary changes to their operations, which will lead to more consolidation and higher food prices for all of America’s families. It’s imperative that the Supreme Court address the constitutionality of Proposition 12. The laws of one state should not set the rules for an entire nation,” Duvall said in a release.
However, NPPC is prepared to actively help states if a state-by-state approach becomes necessary, Humphreys said.
More from Farm Journal’s PORK:
National Pork Board CEO Gets Real About Pork
State Court Halts Enforcement of Prop 12, California Must Finalize Rules First
Prop 12 Countdown: California Food Industry Leaders Fight Back
