1. COUNTING THE COST OF CALIFORNIA'S PROPOSITION 12 POST-ROSS
- Author
-
Bushelle, Taylor
- Subjects
Balancing tests (Law) -- Analysis ,Animal welfare -- Laws, regulations and rules ,Exterritoriality -- Laws, regulations and rules ,Cruelty to animals -- Laws, regulations and rules ,Pork industry -- Laws, regulations and rules ,Strict scrutiny doctrine -- Analysis ,Interstate commerce -- Laws, regulations and rules ,Government regulation ,Education ,Law ,National Pork Producers Council v. EPA (635 F.3d 738 (5th Cir. 2011)) ,Animal Welfare Act ,United States Constitution (U.S. Const. art. 1, s. 8, cl. 3) - Abstract
Animal activists have continually criticized animal confinement throughout the United States. These criticisms have led to States implementing regulations relating to animal care, handling, research, and slaughter. State regulations were limited in scope and only affected in-state producers. This all changed, however, when California voters passed Proposition 12, which regulates animal confinement for any piece of pork sold within California's borders. Furthermore, Proposition 12 requires any piece of pork traveling through California to be labeled indicating whether the pork is compliant or not. By requiring out-of-state producers to comply with the California production requirements, Proposition 12 regulates beyond the state's borders. The Supreme Court in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross upheld the constitutionality of Proposition 12, allowing its regulations to take effect. This paper analyzes the Supreme Court's decision and discusses the effects Proposition 12 will have on the United States pork industry., I. INTRODUCTION The Constitution limits states from regulating outside their borders by long-established precedent in the United States. (1) Furthermore, the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. [...]
- Published
- 2024