{"id":771743,"date":"2023-03-01T08:40:05","date_gmt":"2023-03-01T13:40:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=771743"},"modified":"2023-03-01T09:29:50","modified_gmt":"2023-03-01T14:29:50","slug":"ag-gag-federal-appeals-court-strikes-down-north-carolina-state-law-banning-filming-inside-animal-farms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=771743","title":{"rendered":"UN-GAGGED: U.S. federal appeals court strikes down state law banning filming inside animal farms"},"content":{"rendered":"\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

The court\u2019s ruling recognizes that all Americans have a right to know that workers in the meat industry kick pigs in the face, stomp on chickens and turkeys, and smash piglets\u2019 heads against concrete floors.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/blockquote>\n\n

RACHEL WEINER:<\/strong> A North Carolina law aimed at stopping investigations by animal rights activists violates constitutional free speech protections, an appellate court ruled… The 2015 law bars employees from going into \u201cnonpublic areas of an employer\u2019s premises\u201d for reasons unrelated to work and gathering documents or making recordings that \u201cbreach the person\u2019s duty of loyalty to the employer”…<\/em><\/p>\n

Eight years later, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit has deemed the law a discriminatory intrusion on free speech. \u201cIf PETA\u2019s actions truly violate some lawful prohibition (like trespass), PETA may be charged for that violation,\u201d the court wrote. \u201cWhat North Carolina may not do, however, is craft a law targeting PETA\u2019s protected right to speak.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

The state\u2019s claim that such undercover operations fall outside the First Amendment \u201cis a dangerous proposition that would wipe the Constitution\u2019s most treasured protections from large tranches of our daily lives,\u201d the judges said. \u201cFortunately, it has no basis in law”…<\/em><\/p>\n

It was one of a wave of laws passed across the country in response to undercover expos\u00e9s of the mistreatment of animals on large factory farms. Each one challenged in federal court has been found at least in part unconstitutional, said David Muraskin of Public Justice, a legal nonprofit that led a group challenge to the law.<\/em><\/p>\n

This decision is particularly important, he said, because it ties together several elements used in other recent \u201cag-gag laws\u201d \u2014 it did not specifically target agriculture, it created civil liability rather than a new crime, and it focused on recording and data collection. That the court still deemed the law unconstitutional shows, Muraskin said, \u201cthat the ability of people to conduct investigations and expose misconduct is protected by the First Amendment”…<\/em><\/p>\n

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals [PETA] sued along with other animal rights activists and pro-whistleblower groups… PETA attorney Jared Goodman said in a statement… “The court\u2019s ruling recognizes PETA\u2018s position that all Americans have a right to know that workers in the meat industry kick pigs in the face, stomp on chickens and turkeys, and smash piglets\u2019 heads against concrete floors”… \u201cwill continue to support the constitutional right of whistleblowers and investigators to serve the public and animals by exposing the horrific cruelty that occurs behind the scenes in this industry.\u201d<\/em> SOURCE…<\/em><\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

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