National Pork Producers Council v. Ross

Last updated

National Pork Producers Council v. Ross
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued October 11, 2022
Decided May 11, 2023
Full case nameNational Pork Producers Council, et al. v. Karen Ross, in Her Official Capacity as Secretary of the California Department of Food & Agriculture, et al.
Docket no. 21-468
Citations598 U.S. 356 ( more )
Argument Oral argument
Case history
PriorMotion to dismiss and motion for judgment on the pleadings granted, 456 F.Supp.3d 1201 (S.D. Cal. 2020); affirmed, 6 F.4th 1021 (9th Cir. 2021); cert. granted, 596 U.S. ___(2022).
Holding
Affirmed the lower courts, dismissing the case and allowing the law to stand.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas  · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor  · Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch  · Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett  · Ketanji Brown Jackson
Case opinions
MajorityGorsuch (Parts I, II, III, IV–A, and V), joined by Thomas, Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett
PluralityGorsuch (Parts IV–B and IV–D), joined by Thomas and Barrett
PluralityGorsuch (Part IV–C), joined by Thomas, Sotomayor, Kagan
ConcurrenceSotomayor (in part), joined by Kagan
ConcurrenceBarrett (in part)
Concur/dissentRoberts, joined by Alito, Kavanaugh, Jackson
Concur/dissentKavanaugh
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art I, § 8, cl. 3

National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, 598 U.S. 356 (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the Dormant Commerce Clause.

Contents

Background

In 2018, California's voters approved Proposition 12, which seeks to better the treatment of pigs kept for livestock by barring the sale of pork produced in conditions that are common in the industry today. Much of the pork consumed in the state is imported from other parts of the United States, so the proposition affects the national pork industry as a whole. A group of farmers and corporations in the pork industry, led by the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) and the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), sued the California Department of Food and Agriculture, led by Karen Ross. They asserted the proposition violates the Dormant Commerce Clause, which prevents from passing laws that impact interstate commerce. [1]

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California dismissed the lawsuit, with judge Thomas Whelan stating that Proposition 12 did not attempt to fully regulate the pork industry in other states. [2] The ruling was upheld in a 3-0 decision at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. [1]

NPPC filed a petition for a writ of certiorari. [3]

Certiorari was granted in the case on March 28, 2022. Oral arguments were heard on October 11, 2022.

The Biden administration asked the court to overturn the law in order to protect the country's pork industry. [4]

Judgement

The Supreme Court issued its decision on May 11, 2023. In a 5–4 ruling, the court upheld the lower court ruling in dismissing the lawsuit and ruling Proposition 12 was legal. [4] The majority opinion was written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, joined by Justices Thomas, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Barrett. [1] Gorsuch accepted that states do have an interest in protecting the public health and welfare, and that this may extend to behavior occurring outside of the state. However, Gorsuch continued that while the Constitution does outline specific behavior that cannot be overridden by state laws, the requirements of Proposition 12 fell well outside that. [1]

Gorsuch addressed the ruling in Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc. , agreeing with the judgement but stating that its standard of prohibiting "clearly excessive" effects on interstate commerce was too vague. The court did not have a majority opinion regarding the weighing of noneconomic benefits such as animal welfare against economic costs. [5] In Section IV-B, joined only by a plurality, Gorsuch suggested that courts should only be able to use the comparative balancing test from Pike when the variables to be balanced can be measured and compared directly. To him, the comparison of economic cost to humane treatment was "incommensurable."

When the Justices' votes and justifications are counted, there was a clear majority that believed Pike remains valid, namely: Roberts, Kavanaugh, Alito, Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor. There was also a clear majority among the justices that that Proposition 12 could not survive a Pike analysis, namely: Roberts, Kavanaugh, Alito, Jackson, and Barret. The fractured plurality ultimately decided to uphold the law, creating a voting paradox. Therefore, the precise precedential meaning of the case is unclear. [6]

Analyst Ian Millhiser wrote that the case was a rare instance of the Court reducing the judiciary's ability to block state laws. [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

The National Pork Producers Council is a trade association representing U.S. pork producers and other industry stakeholders. It lobbies on behalf of its affiliated state associations from its headquarters in Des Moines, Iowa.

Knox v. Service Employees International Union, 567 U.S. 298 (2012), is a United States constitutional law case. The United States Supreme Court held in a 7–2 decision that Dianne Knox and other non-members of the Service Employees International Union did not receive the required notice of a $12 million assessment the union charged them to raise money for the union's political fund. In a tighter 5–4 ruling, the court further held that the long-standing precedent, the First Amendment requirement that non-union members covered by union contracts be given the chance to "opt out" of special fees was insufficient. Setting new precedent, the majority ruled that non-members shall be sent notice giving them the option to opt into special fees.

Sessions v. Dimaya, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), a statute defining certain "aggravated felonies" for immigration purposes, is unconstitutionally vague. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) classifies some categories of crimes as "aggravated felonies", and immigrants convicted of those crimes, including those legally present in the United States, are almost certain to be deported. Those categories include "crimes of violence", which are defined by the "elements clause" and the "residual clause". The Court struck down the "residual clause", which classified every felony that, "by its nature, involves a substantial risk" of "physical force against the person or property" as an aggravated felony.

Abbott v. Perez, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the redistricting of the state of Texas following the 2010 census.

Apple Inc. v. Pepper, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case related to antitrust laws related to third-party resellers. The case centers on Apple Inc.'s App Store, and whether consumers of apps offered through the store have Article III standing under federal antitrust laws to bring a class-action antitrust lawsuit against Apple for practices it uses to regulate the App Store. The case centers on the applicability of the "Illinois Brick doctrine" established by the Supreme Court in 1977 via Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, which determined that indirect consumers of products lack Article III standing to bring antitrust charges against producers of those products. In its 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that since consumers purchased apps directly through Apple, that they have standing under Illinois Brick to seek antitrust charges against Apple.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2018 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States</span>

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down seven per curiam opinions during its 2018 term, which began October 1, 2018, and concluded October 6, 2019.

Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case that determined that unless they consent, states have sovereign immunity from private suits filed against them in the courts of another state. The 5–4 decision overturned precedent set in a 1979 Supreme Court case, Nevada v. Hall. This was the third time that the litigants had presented their case to the Court, as the Court had already ruled on the issue in 2003 and 2016.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2019 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States</span>

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down ten per curiam opinions during its 2019 term, which began October 7, 2019 and concluded October 4, 2020.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2020 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States</span>

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down fourteen per curiam opinions during its 2020 term, which began October 5, 2020 and concluded October 3, 2021.

United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution as it related to patent judges on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). In a complex decision, the Court ruled that these judges were considered "primary officers" under the Appointments Clause, normally subject to appointment through the US President and the US Senate, but to remedy the matter, the Court ruled that the constitutional issue is resolved by allowing the PTAB decisions to be subject to review by the appropriately-appointed Director of the Patent Office.

HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC v. Renewable Fuels Association, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with exemptions from blending requirements for small refineries set by the Renewable Fuel Standard program. The case dealt with the statutory interpretation of the congressional language for extending the exemption, if this allowed a lapse in the exemption or not. In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that by the majority's interpretation of the law, the congressional law did allow for refineries to seek extensions after their exemption period had lapsed.

United States v. Zubaydah, 595 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the state secrets privilege.

Shurtleff v. City of Boston, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case concerned the City of Boston's program that allowed groups to have their flags flown outside Boston City Hall. In a unanimous 9–0 decision, the Court ruled that the city violated a Christian group's free speech rights when it denied their request to raise a Christian flag over City Hall.

Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 593 U.S. ___ (2021), was an immigration decision by the United States Supreme Court. In a 6–3 decision authored by Neil Gorsuch, the Court ruled against the federal government, holding that deportation hearing notices need to be in a single document. Although a highly technical case, the decision received attention for being predicated on the single-letter word a.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2021 term per curiam opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States</span>

The Supreme Court of the United States handed down eight per curiam opinions during its 2021 term, which began October 4, 2021 and concluded October 2, 2022.

Shinn v. Ramirez, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court related to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. The court held that new evidence that was not in the state court's records, based on ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel, could not be used in an appeal to a federal court.

Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held, 6–3, that the government, while following the Establishment Clause, may not suppress an individual from engaging in personal religious observance, as doing so would violate the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment.

Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. ___ (2023), also known as Sackett II, was a United States Supreme Court case related to the scope of the Clean Water Act.

Allen v. Milligan, 599 U. S. 1 (2023), is a United States Supreme Court case related to redistricting under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). The appellees and respondants argued that Alabama's congressional districts discriminated against African-American voters. The Court ruled 5–4 that Alabama’s districts likely violated the VRA, maintained an injunction that required Alabama to create an additional majority-minority district, and held that Section 2 of the VRA is constitutional in the redistricting context.

Moore v. Harper, 600 U.S. 1 (2023), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States related to independent state legislature theory (ISL), a doctrine that asserts state legislatures have sole authority to establish election laws for federal elections within their respective states without judicial review by state courts, presentment to state governors, and without constraint by state constitutions. The case arose from the redistricting of North Carolina's districts by its legislature after the 2020 United States census, which the state courts found to be too artificial and partisan, and an extreme case of gerrymandering in favor of the Republican Party.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Howe, Amy (May 11, 2023). "Court upholds California animal-welfare law". SCOTUSblog . Retrieved May 13, 2023.
  2. Davies, Steve (April 29, 2020). "Judge dismisses suit challenging California's Prop 12". Argi-Pulse. Retrieved May 13, 2023.
  3. Howe, Amy (March 28, 2022). "Justices add three new cases, including challenge to animal-welfare law and Warhol copyright dispute". SCOTUSblog . Retrieved May 4, 2022.
  4. 1 2 "Supreme Court rejects challenge to California pork law mandating more space for pigs". www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved May 12, 2023.
  5. 1 2 Millhiser, Ian (May 11, 2023). "The Supreme Court rediscovers humility — in a case about pigs". Vox. Retrieved May 15, 2023.
  6. "Term Talk (2022-2023): National Pork Producers Council v. Ross". October 12, 2023. Retrieved December 4, 2023.