- The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has upheld the legality of Massachusetts’ Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act (“Question 3“) after pork industry members failed to argue that it violates the US Constitution and is preempted by federal law.
- Question 3 (Q3) imposes minimum space requirements for breeding sows, veal calves, and egg-laying hens and went into effect in August 2023. As with California’s Proposition 12, the space requirements allow more space for animals to stand up, lie down, extend limbs, and turn around freely.
- As we previously reported, pork producers filed suit in the US District Court of Massachusetts, arguing that Q3 intentionally discriminates against interstate commerce by disadvantaging out-of-state farmers, and thus unconstitutional. Plaintiffs also argued that Q3 is preempted by the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA). However, the district court rejected these constitutional arguments and held that the law was not preempted by FMIA because it does not regulate slaughterhouse operations. Plaintiffs then appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and were backed by 22 states.
- The appeals court disagreed with the plaintiffs’ constitutional arguments, noting that both Massachusetts and out-of-state producers must abide by the same regulations. It also concluded that, given the Supreme Court’s ruling on California’s Proposition 12, plaintiffs did not clear the threshold needed to show a “substantial burden” on interstate commerce. Additionally, the court held that FMIA does not expressly preempt Q3 because Q3 regulates pork production, rather than pork inspection like FMIA, and because complying with Q3 does not “render it impossible” to comply with FMIA.
- Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor litigation addressing state food and agriculture legislation.