{"id":767630,"date":"2022-03-31T08:09:16","date_gmt":"2022-03-31T12:09:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=767630"},"modified":"2022-03-31T08:25:52","modified_gmt":"2022-03-31T12:25:52","slug":"out-of-space-u-s-supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-challenge-to-california-animal-anti-cruelty-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=767630","title":{"rendered":"OUT OF SPACE AND TIME: U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear challenge to California animal anti-cruelty law"},"content":{"rendered":"\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

California's law bars the in-state sale of meat from breeding pigs denied at least 24 square feet of usable floorspace. A typical breeding pig is about six feet long and 23 inches wide when lying down.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/blockquote>\n\n

DAVID G. SAVAGE:<\/strong> The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a constitutional challenge to a California ballot measure that would force pork producers across the country to end \u201cextreme methods\u201d of confining breeding pigs. The justices will review Prop. 12 and its provisions against animal cruelty, and decide whether out-of-state producers may be required to change their practices if they want to sell their products in California.<\/em><\/p>\n

The court\u2019s action casts some doubt on the future of the state measure, which has forced major changes in the egg and veal industries. Nearly 63% of California voters approved Prop. 12 in 2018 to \u201cprevent animal cruelty by phasing out extreme methods of farm animal confinement, which also threaten the health and safety of California consumers and increase the risk of food-borne illness.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The state\u2019s lawyers told the court that the measure \u201cwill bar the in-state sale of meat from breeding pigs denied at least 24 square feet of usable floorspace. A stall or enclosure with internal dimensions of six feet by four feet, for example, would satisfy that standard. A typical breeding pig is about six feet long and 23 inches wide when lying down.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Several large meatpacking companies, including Hormel, announced they would comply with California\u2019s law, but the National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau Federation went to court arguing the state was violating the Constitution\u2019s protection for the free flow of interstate commerce… <\/em>A federal judge in San Diego dismissed their suit on the grounds the producers had no claim of a constitutional violation, and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed last year… <\/em><\/p>\n

In dismissing the suit from the pork producers, U.S. appellate judge Sandra Ikuta said states violate the commerce clause \u201conly in narrow circumstances…. <\/em>A state law may require out-of-state producers to meet burdensome requirements in order to sell their products in the state without violating the dormant Commerce Clause,\u201d she wrote for the 9th Circuit. SOURCE…<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

RELATED VIDEOS:<\/strong><\/p>\n