Massachusetts humane pork law survives industry court challenge
By Nate Raymond
July 22 (Reuters) -A federal judge on Monday rejected an industry-backed bid to block enforcement of a Massachusetts law banning the sale of pork from pigs kept in tightly confined spaces, saying a federal law governing slaughterhouses does not preempt it.
U.S. District Judge William Young in Boston rejected arguments by Missouri-based pork producer Triumph Foods and out-of-state pig farmers that the state law conflicted with a federal law regulating slaughterhouse inspections.
The pork producers argued the Federal Meat Inspection Act preempted the state's law because it created additional, different requirements on how pigs are to be handled than the federal law provided.
But Young said Massachusetts' law does no more than ban the sale of non-compliant pork meat and does not regulate how a slaughterhouse itself operates.
He said all a slaughterhouse needs to be able to do to sell pork in Massachusetts is be able to identify if the meat originated from a legally compliant pig.
"Slaughterhouses may still operate in the same way they did previously — noncompliant pork processing is not only allowed, but slaughterhouses are not even required to segregate noncompliant pork from compliant pork," he said.
Representatives for Triumph and Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, whose office defended the law, had no immediate comment.
The restrictions were part of the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, which barred the sales of pork, veal and eggs in Massachusetts from pigs, calves and hens whose confinement failed to meet certain minimum space requirements.
The measure was adopted through a ballot initiative that 77% of voters approved of in 2016.
The lawsuit focused only on a provision that bars the sale of pork meat originating from breeding pigs who were "cruelly confined" in spaces that prevent them from lying down, standing up, fully extending their limbs or turning around freely.
The law mirrored a similar voter-approved measure in California. Those pork-related provisions were similarly challenged by industry groups, but the U.S. Supreme Court in May preserved the law by dismissing the case on a 5-4 vote.
Young in February ruled that one part of the Massachusetts law was unconstitutional and discriminated against out-of-state pork processors.
That provision created an exemption allowing for sales of pork that do not meet the requirements at federally inspected slaughterhouses in Massachusetts so long as buyers take possession of the pork while on their premises, rather than at grocery stores.
But Young severed that provision rather than blocking the whole law, saying it could be separated without frustrating the law's overall purpose.
The case is Triumph Foods LLC v. Campbell, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, No. 23-cv-11671.
For Triumph Foods: Cynthia Cordes of Husch Blackwell
For Massachusetts: Grace Gohlke, Vanessa Arslanian and Maryanne Reynolds of the Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General
Read more:
Part of Massachusetts pork law ruled unconstitutional, rest survives
U.S. Supreme Court preserves California humane pig confinement law
Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston
Últimas notícias
Isenção de Responsabilidade: As entidades do XM Group proporcionam serviço de apenas-execução e acesso à nossa plataforma online de negociação, permitindo a visualização e/ou uso do conteúdo disponível no website ou através deste, o que não se destina a alterar ou a expandir o supracitado. Tal acesso e uso estão sempre sujeitos a: (i) Termos e Condições; (ii) Avisos de Risco; e (iii) Termos de Responsabilidade. Este, é desta forma, fornecido como informação generalizada. Particularmente, por favor esteja ciente que os conteúdos da nossa plataforma online de negociação não constituem solicitação ou oferta para iniciar qualquer transação nos mercados financeiros. Negociar em qualquer mercado financeiro envolve um nível de risco significativo de perda do capital.
Todo o material publicado na nossa plataforma de negociação online tem apenas objetivos educacionais/informativos e não contém — e não deve ser considerado conter — conselhos e recomendações financeiras, de negociação ou fiscalidade de investimentos, registo de preços de negociação, oferta e solicitação de transação em qualquer instrumento financeiro ou promoção financeira não solicitada direcionadas a si.
Qual conteúdo obtido por uma terceira parte, assim como o conteúdo preparado pela XM, tais como, opiniões, pesquisa, análises, preços, outra informação ou links para websites de terceiras partes contidos neste website são prestados "no estado em que se encontram", como um comentário de mercado generalizado e não constitui conselho de investimento. Na medida em que qualquer conteúdo é construído como pesquisa de investimento, deve considerar e aceitar que este não tem como objetivo e nem foi preparado de acordo com os requisitos legais concebidos para promover a independência da pesquisa de investimento, desta forma, deve ser considerado material de marketing sob as leis e regulações relevantes. Por favor, certifique-se que leu e compreendeu a nossa Notificação sobre Pesquisa de Investimento não-independente e o Aviso de Risco, relativos à informação supracitada, os quais podem ser acedidos aqui.
