Pork processor and others dispute legality of a Massachusetts law about sow housing regs
Triumph Foods, a pork processor, announced that it launched a lawsuit in a Massachusetts federal court to dispute the legality of a Massachusetts law about sow housing regulations.
The law in question is the Act to Prevent Cruelty to Farm Animals, also known as Question 3. It was due to be implemented on July 12, but the commencement was postponed to Aug. 23. Massachusetts voters originally backed the measure in 2016.
Other entities that joined Triumph Foods in this legal action include Christensen Farms Midwest LLC, The Hanor Co. of Wisconsin LLC, New Fashion Pork LLP, Eichelberger Farms Inc., and Allied Producers’ Cooperative, which is a collective of smaller Midwest farmers.
Triumph Foods used the Supreme Court’s May decision concerning California’s Proposition 12 as a reference. In its legal filing, Triumph argued that the ruling against the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) on Prop 12 was specific to a limited number of claims and did not confirm the measure’s constitutionality.
Matt England, Triumph Foods’ president and CEO, stated that “Discriminatory trade restrictions like Q3 and Prop 12 hinder the establishment of resilient, dependable food supply chains throughout the United States” and negatively impact small enterprises, employees, consumers, and public sectors. He emphasized the importance of free and open interstate commerce for the nation’s economic growth.
Triumph highlighted that last year, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar backed several agricultural trade organizations in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court about Prop 12. Prelogar had noted that the U.S. Congress transferred food safety duties to USDA, the department that regulates pork supplies.
In June, the state of California postponed compliance with Prop 12 until December 31.
Furthermore, Triumph Foods expressed support for similar litigation initiated by the Iowa Pork Producers Association (IPPA).