RESIST, PERSIST: U.S. federal judge upholds Iowa’s ban on using hidden cameras to document animal abuse
A U.S. federal district judge upheld the constitutionality of Iowa’s ban on a trespasser's use of a camera or recording device to investigate animal abuse in 'livestock' facilities. The judge wrote that while the plaintiffs’ recordings at livestock facilities address matters of public controversy, which the First Amendment protects, the state has an interest in protecting the property rights of those livestock facility owners against illegal trespassers. An attorney representing the plaintiffs, PETA and FarmSTAND, stated the ruling enables the state to hide business misconduct and suppress freedom of speech and civil disobedience. The plaintiffs are evaluating whether to appeal.
ROX LAIRD: A U.S. federal district judge… upheld the constitutionality of Iowa’s ban on a trespasser’s “use” of a camera or recording device to investigate animal abuse in livestock facilities. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa granted the state’s motion to dismiss the suit by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals [PETA] and an Iowa citizens’ group [FarmSTAND] held that Iowa’s law withstands constitutional scrutiny as applied to the plaintiffs.
Chief U.S. District Judge Stephanie Rose, a Barack Obama appointee, wrote in a 22-page ruling that the targeted approach of Iowa’s law “directly advances Iowa’s substantial interests in protecting property rights and privacy while leaving open ample alternative channels for plaintiffs to disseminate their message through lawful means.”
Rose wrote that while the plaintiffs’ recordings at livestock facilities address matters of public controversy, which the First Amendment “most vigorously protects,” the state has an interest in protecting the property rights of those livestock facility owners against illegal trespassers who make a record of their unlawful presence…
The decision by the federal district court in Des Moines came in response to a question remanded by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Earlier, the Eighth Circuit had otherwise mostly upheld the constitutionality of Iowa’s statute that makes it a crime to “place” a camera or electronic surveillance device while trespassing on the property of a livestock facility.
But a three-judge panel of the appeals court said the plaintiffs — People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals [PETA] and other animal rights advocates who seek to expose animal abuse in livestock facilities — had standing to challenge the constitutionality of the statute’s provision barring a trespasser’s “use” of a camera or recording device…
David Samuel Muraskin, an attorney with the Washington, D.C.-based FarmSTAND representing the plaintiffs, told Courthouse News the ruling enables the state to “hide businesses’ misconduct and suppress civil disobedience if the government simply asserts it is seeking to protect private property.”
“Until the legislature has the courage to repeal laws like this that were passed at the behest of factory farms to hide animal abuse and squelch debate about their practices, the courts are the only hope we have to preserve rights and honest discourse.” Thus, he said, the plaintiffs are evaluating whether to appeal. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEO: