|
Court rejects challenge to Calif. confinement measure
Story Date: 9/14/2012
| |
Source: Dani Friedland, MEATINGPLACE, 9/13/12
On Wednesday, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California rejected a challenge to the constitutionality of a ballot measure concerning how livestock are housed.
Proposition 2, also known as the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, mandates that pregnant pigs, veal calves, and laying hens be housed such that they can lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs, and turn around freely.
Egg producer William Cramer challenged the constitutionality of Proposition 2 on the grounds that it in unconstitutionally vague (violating the due process clause) and imposes excessive burdens on interstate commerce (violating the commerce clause).
Writing for the court, U.S. District Judge John Walter found that Cramer’s challenge “fails to present a single example of how Proposition 2 would be vague in its application, much less in all of its applications.”
With regard to the commerce clause challenge, the court wrote:
“Plaintiff alleges purely hypothetical and speculative burdens on interstate commerce…Moreover, these hypothetical and speculative burdens, even if they are realized, are clearly not excessive in relation to the legitimate state interest in preventing cruelty to animals.”
Ultimately, the court granted the Humane Society of the United States’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. It also granted a motion to dismiss the first amended complaint put forward by California Attorney General Kamala Harris and Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr., who are both named as defendants.
The court dismissed Cramer’s claims with prejudice and denied him the ability to amend the amended complaint. In addition, the court denied the Association of California Egg Farmers’ motion to intervene.
Proposition 2 is scheduled to take effect Jan. 1, 2015.
For more stories, go to http://www.meatingplace.com/.
|
|
|
|
