Ohio Pig Farmers vs State of California
Please consider Ohio Pig Farmers Didn’t Get a Vote on California’s Proposition 12
The Supreme Court will hear “the bacon case” on Oct. 11. National Pork Producers Council v. Ross challenges California’s Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act, also known as Proposition 12. It’s an ill-conceived and unconstitutional 2018 law that attempts to use the Golden State’s enormous market power as leverage to regulate pig farming nationwide.
California lawmakers often presume they know what’s best—in this case for pigs and pig farmers across the country. State regulators are currently training inspectors to disperse across the nation to enforce California’s rules. Out-of-state farmers must certify that their products are compliant with Proposition 12 to be sold in California.
Proposition 12 pressures pork producers to adopt California’s rules, even when those rules prohibit activities that are explicitly legal in the farmers’ own states. With more than 99% of the pork consumed in California coming from out-of-state farms, the practical effect of California’s Proposition 12 is to regulate out-of-state farmers.
Beyond its arrogance, California’s Proposition 12 violates the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. Farmers in Ohio and 48 other states shouldn’t be forced to endure this insult.
California is training its inspectors to travel to other states and impose its rules elsewhere.
The arrogance is stunning and ridiculous.
This post originated at MishTalk.Com
Please Subscribe!
Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.
Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.
If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.
Mish
“Beyond its arrogance, California’s Proposition 12
violates the Constitution’s Commerce Clause.”
Would the ‘ban’ on new internal combustion engine vehicles
in California also violate said clause? Prop 65 resulted in labels/”warnings” on a myriad of products, a simple solution would be to do something similar and label incoming meat that
isn’t in compliance. “HSC section 25990 prohibits a farm owner or
operator from knowingly causing any covered animal to be confined in a cruel
manner, as specified, and prohibits a business owner or operator from knowingly
engaging in the sale within the state of shell eggs, liquid eggs, whole pork
meat or whole veal meat, as defined, from animals housed in a cruel manner.“
Without taking a deep dive into the text, improving living
conditions for livestock in industrial settings would have merit. Conditions in some of those places are unconscionable.
Interstate commerce has always been tricky. Here is an
example that some find outrageous, with the added bonus of illustrating how
much the dollar has been devalued over the past 80 years:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/317/11
https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/wickard-v-filburn/
Call_Me_Al
That would mean they all become vegetarians?! LOL
The Nobel Prize is now a participation trophy.
Well, don’t want to comply with that? OK, don’t sell in California. As simple as that. No one is forcing these farmers to sell their products in California.
pigs were born to sows with at least 24-square-feet of space and an
ability to turn around.”
They are frauds on their anti-war rhetoric as well. They are supposedly anti-war but they are against banning military hardware corporations funding the elections of those who decide when and where and with whom we go to war.
Declaring that you will only import and allow for sale products that meet certain standards is standard trade policy. This isn’t regulating other states. It’s regulating products for sale in your state. Sellers have every right to tell CA to F off.
This would be like an bookkeeper suing because a customer wanted a CPA.