Meat groups fight over COOL
July 26, 2013 | 02:00 PM
Nine U.S., Canadian, and Mexican meat and livestock groups have asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to grant a preliminary injunction to block implementation of a mandatory country-of-origin labeling (COOL) rule finalized by the Agriculture Department in May.
Another cattle group that favors COOL announced that it will lead an effort to intervene in the lawsuit.
The rule went into effect on May 23, but USDA has provided a six-month window for the industry to prepare for the new regulations.
The American Association of Meat Processors, American Meat Institute, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, Canadian Pork Council, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Pork Producers Council, North American Meat Association, Southwest Meat Association and Mexico’s National Confederation of Livestock Organizations, which filed a suit on July 8 to stop the rule, said that if the rule is not enjoined before it goes into effect, it "will irreparably harm meat-industry participants.”
The 2008 farm bill included a provision requiring country-of-origin labeling for meat and other products, but the World Trade Organization ruled in response to a complaint by Canada and Mexico that the requirements put forward by the Obama administration violated the United States’ WTO obligations.
USDA responded with a more detailed labeling program that the agency says will address the WTO concerns but that the plaintiffs say will cause them more expense and harm than the first.
A USDA spokesman said the agency could not comment on a pending legal matter, but noted that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and other officials have defended the rewritten rule in many public statements.
Leo McDonnell
Leo McDonnell, director emeritus of the United States Cattlemen’s Association, which favors COOL, announced today that USCA will lead COOL supporters in intervention in the lawsuit.
“The USCA board has unanimously chosen to intervene in this case and will lead a national effort to coordinate and network other key industry groups and associations into the process,” McDonnell said.
“This is an extremely important move and it must happen rapidly,” he said. “It is our responsibility to intervene in this lawsuit to ensure that the court hears from the U.S. cattle industry and receives facts and arguments that will have a more meaningful impact coming from the industry itself.”
“The eight plaintiffs in this case seek to remove from us our right to differentiate our product with a USA label,” McDonnell said.
NCBA and the other plaintiffs argue that “beef is beef, whether the cattle are raised in Montana, Manitoba or Mazatlan.”
Many producer groups, such as USCA, and consumer groups believe that consumers are entitled to the type of information the revised USDA regulations provide.
“It is important that those who believe this have their voices heard in this litigation,” McDonnell added. “This case involves various challenges, including a constitutionality question. At the district court level, this case is likely to be more complicated than just a single round of briefings.”
“With that in mind, USCA is preparing an intervention that will take us through a potential trial court phase and any hearings scheduled,” he said. “Our legal counsel is drafting the initial court filings and fundraising has commenced to meet the costs. We have initiated contact with auction markets soliciting their help with fundraising and have received overwhelming support. Auction markets in the Dakotas and Montana are already organizing rollover calf sales and other efforts to assist with raising the funds needed for this action."
Another cattle group that favors COOL announced that it will lead an effort to intervene in the lawsuit.
The rule went into effect on May 23, but USDA has provided a six-month window for the industry to prepare for the new regulations.
The American Association of Meat Processors, American Meat Institute, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, Canadian Pork Council, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Pork Producers Council, North American Meat Association, Southwest Meat Association and Mexico’s National Confederation of Livestock Organizations, which filed a suit on July 8 to stop the rule, said that if the rule is not enjoined before it goes into effect, it "will irreparably harm meat-industry participants.”
The 2008 farm bill included a provision requiring country-of-origin labeling for meat and other products, but the World Trade Organization ruled in response to a complaint by Canada and Mexico that the requirements put forward by the Obama administration violated the United States’ WTO obligations.
USDA responded with a more detailed labeling program that the agency says will address the WTO concerns but that the plaintiffs say will cause them more expense and harm than the first.
A USDA spokesman said the agency could not comment on a pending legal matter, but noted that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and other officials have defended the rewritten rule in many public statements.
Leo McDonnell
Leo McDonnell, director emeritus of the United States Cattlemen’s Association, which favors COOL, announced today that USCA will lead COOL supporters in intervention in the lawsuit.
“The USCA board has unanimously chosen to intervene in this case and will lead a national effort to coordinate and network other key industry groups and associations into the process,” McDonnell said.
“This is an extremely important move and it must happen rapidly,” he said. “It is our responsibility to intervene in this lawsuit to ensure that the court hears from the U.S. cattle industry and receives facts and arguments that will have a more meaningful impact coming from the industry itself.”
“The eight plaintiffs in this case seek to remove from us our right to differentiate our product with a USA label,” McDonnell said.
NCBA and the other plaintiffs argue that “beef is beef, whether the cattle are raised in Montana, Manitoba or Mazatlan.”
Many producer groups, such as USCA, and consumer groups believe that consumers are entitled to the type of information the revised USDA regulations provide.
“It is important that those who believe this have their voices heard in this litigation,” McDonnell added. “This case involves various challenges, including a constitutionality question. At the district court level, this case is likely to be more complicated than just a single round of briefings.”
“With that in mind, USCA is preparing an intervention that will take us through a potential trial court phase and any hearings scheduled,” he said. “Our legal counsel is drafting the initial court filings and fundraising has commenced to meet the costs. We have initiated contact with auction markets soliciting their help with fundraising and have received overwhelming support. Auction markets in the Dakotas and Montana are already organizing rollover calf sales and other efforts to assist with raising the funds needed for this action."
