The United States. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to Massachusetts’ Question 3 animal confinement law, leaving the measure in place.
The measure is similar to California’s Proposition 12 which has upset farmers and meat packers and complicated nation-wide distribution chains.
The Massachusetts case was brought by pork producers Triumph Foods, Christensen Farms Midwest, The Hanor Company of Wisconsin, New Fashion Pork, Eichelberger Farms and Allied Producers’ Cooperative against Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell.
Approved by Massachusetts voters in 2016, Question 3 prohibits the sale of pork in the state unless it comes from animals raised under specified confinement standards, regardless of where the animals were produced. The law applies to out-of-state pork producers seeking access to the Massachusetts market.
The challenge received support from Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and attorneys general from 23 other states, who filed a brief urging the court to strike down the law.
The states argued that Massachusetts lacks authority to regulate livestock production practices beyond its borders and that the law imposes significant compliance costs on pork producers nationwide.
