Supreme Court rejects fast-track challenges to livestock-confinement laws in California and Massachusetts

"Two groups of state attorneys general were blocked Monday from bringing a challenge in the U.S. Supreme Court against California and Massachusetts laws that set standards for the treatment of farm animals raised to produce eggs and some meats sold in those states," Bill Lucia reports for Route Fifty. "The attorneys general were asking the Supreme Court to allow their lawsuits to proceed directly to high court, without going through lower federal courts first."

Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill led a group of other attorneys general opposing the Massachusetts law and Missouri Attorney General Joshua Hawley led mostly the same group of AGs to oppose California's laws: those of Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin. "Those involved in the effort against the Massachusetts law were from mostly the same states. But South Carolina and West Virginia’s attorneys general also took part and Nevada and Iowa’s attorneys general did not," Lucia reports.

The Massachusetts and California laws are meant to improve confined farm animals' welfare by giving them more room to move. The California law, which went into effect in 2015, protects egg-laying hens. The Massachusetts law, passed more than two years ago and scheduled to go fully into effect on Jan. 1, 2022, centers on egg-layers, veal calves and pigs. Sales of such animal products will be prohibited if they come from operations the state considers excessively confined, Lucia reports.

"The attorneys general behind the current cases suggest the California and Massachusetts laws run afoul of federal law and are in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause, which prohibits state laws that discriminate against, or significantly impede interstate commerce," Lucia reports.