• We previously blogged about a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit alleging that Michigan’s law banning the sale of eggs that are not produced according to certain animal welfare standards was preempted by the federal Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA). We also blogged about a similar DOJ lawsuit in California that was dismissed in March for lack of standing.
  • Michigan filed a motion earlier this month in the Michigan lawsuit seeking dismissal of the DOJ lawsuit, arguing that the government had no standing to pursue the lawsuit and that the Michigan law was not preempted.
  • On the standing issue, Michigan cited the March decision from the California case, as well as other older but similar cases that had been filed against California by other States, and all of which found that the state government plaintiffs had not suffered an injury establishing Article III standing. Preemption provisions like the one in the EPIA regulate the conduct of private actors, and not the government, and if the DOJ was correct that the Michigan law was preempted, it would be void and without effect on the government.
  • With respect to the substantive question of preemption, Michigan argued that there was no preemption because the EPIA preempts different state standards with respect to the condition and quality of eggs. The Michigan law did not regulate the condition or quality of eggs, but rather animal housing standards. The housing condition of the hens could not be detected by examination of the eggs.
  • The Michigan lawsuit case number is 1:26-cv-00246.