Biden Administration Backs NPPC, Farm Bureau in Prop 12 Supreme Court Case

The U.S. government filed a brief to the Supreme Court supporting the National Pork Producers Council and American Farm Bureau Federation's challenge to California’s animal housing law, Proposition 12.

The U.S. government filed a brief to the Supreme Court supporting the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and American Farm Bureau Federation's (AFBF) challenge to California’s animal housing law, Proposition 12. This state law seeks to ban the sale of pork from pigs that do not meet the state’s arbitrary production standards, including pork from pigs raised on farms outside of California, NPPC said in a release.

In an amicus brief, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said California “'has no legitimate interest in protecting’ the welfare of animals located outside the state,” quoting a previous Supreme Court decision.

The brief pointed out voters in pork-producing states must determine what constitutes "cruel" treatment of animals housed in those states — not voters in California. The brief quoted a 1935 Supreme Court decision, Baldwin v. G.A.F. Seelig Inc., Pro Farmer analyst Jim Wiesemeyer shared in Policy Updates e-newsletter.

"Of note, Senate Ag Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) previously called on USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack to support California's Proposition 12 before the Supreme Court," Wiesemeyer wrote.

Prelogar’s brief said the U.S. takes no position on whether petitioners will ultimately be able to prove that Proposition 12 unduly restricts interstate commerce under the Supreme Court’s Pike v. Bruce Church Inc. decision.

However at this point, “petitioners have plausibly alleged that Proposition 12 will have substantial adverse impacts on the interstate pork market,” her brief said, urging the Supreme Court to reverse the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to dismiss the ag groups’ challenge, and remand the case to the appeals court.

“If petitioners prove those allegations, then those burdens are ‘clearly excessive in relation to’ what petitioners allege to be insubstantial or non-existent ‘local benefits,’” Prelogar said.

Preserve the Free Flow of Commerce

NPPC praised the Biden Administration for standing up for consumer choice and American farmers in a release on June 21.

“We commend the Biden administration for taking action to stop ill-considered ballot initiatives like California’s Proposition 12 that undermine vital supply chains, national markets and consumer choice and further inflate food prices,” Michael Formica, NPPC assistant vice president and general counsel, said in a release. “Additional supporters filed briefs opposing Proposition 12 and stood up to preserve the free flow of commerce among states to ensure consumers all over the nation have access to affordable, safe and wholesome food.”

In a joint brief to the Supreme Court filed earlier this month, NPPC and AFBF argued Proposition 12 violates the U.S. Constitution’s commerce clause, which restricts states from regulating commerce outside their borders. The brief states that Proposition 12 “will require massive and costly changes across the entire $26-billion-a-year hog farming industry. And it inescapably projects California’s policy choices into every other state, a number of which expressly permit their farmers to house sows in ways inconsistent with Proposition 12.”

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on Oct. 11.

Amicus briefs filed in support of NPPC and AFBF: