Meat industry groups file suit against COOL rule
July 10, 2013 | 11:53 PM
Eight organizations representing the U.S. and Canadian meat and livestock industries on Tuesday filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to block implementation of a mandatory country-of-origin labeling (“COOL”) rule finalized by the Agriculture Department in May in response to a World Trade Organization ruling that a previous U.S. COOL rule violated WTO standards.
USDA and the National Farmers Union, which has favored labeling, defended the rule.
In their complaint, the meat and livestock organizations maintain that the final rule violates the U.S. Constitution by compelling speech in the form of costly and detailed labels on meat products that do not directly advance a government interest.
The organizations also say the new regulation exceeds the scope of the law that Congress passed to require labeling “because the statute does not permit the kind of detailed and onerous labeling requirements the final rule puts in place, and that the rule is arbitrary and capricious, because it imposes vast burdens on the industry with little to no countervailing benefit.”
In a case brought against the United States by Canada, a WTO panel ruled that its standards allow country-of-origin labeling but that the way the United States had structured the rule damaged the interests of Canadian producers. In response USDA made the rule more detailed.
Plaintiffs include 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, and Southwest Meat Association.
A USDA spokeswoman said the department cannot comment on the lawsuit, but that “USDA remains confident that these changes will improve the overall operation of the program and also bring the mandatory COOL requirements into compliance with U.S. international trade obligations.
National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson said the lawsuit was a delaying tactic.
“Time and again, many organizations that represent or are heavily influenced by meatpackers have dragged their feet when it comes to COOL," Johnson said in a statement.
“They prevented COOL from being implemented after the 2002 farm bill, tried to block it following the 2008 farm bill, and now are suing to stop the revised COOL rules from taking effect,” Johnson said. “Such delaying and stalling tactics only serve to deprive their customers of important information about the products they buy.”
“The United States is not the first country to require COOL, and it is popular with the general public,” Johnson added. “Other countries have implemented COOL. In fact, as of 2007, Canada and 47 other countries had either enacted or were planning to establish COOL. A 2008 Consumer Reports poll found that 95 percent of consumers believe that processed or packaged food should be labeled by country of origin and that country of origin should always be available at point of purchase.”
USDA and the National Farmers Union, which has favored labeling, defended the rule.
In their complaint, the meat and livestock organizations maintain that the final rule violates the U.S. Constitution by compelling speech in the form of costly and detailed labels on meat products that do not directly advance a government interest.
The organizations also say the new regulation exceeds the scope of the law that Congress passed to require labeling “because the statute does not permit the kind of detailed and onerous labeling requirements the final rule puts in place, and that the rule is arbitrary and capricious, because it imposes vast burdens on the industry with little to no countervailing benefit.”
In a case brought against the United States by Canada, a WTO panel ruled that its standards allow country-of-origin labeling but that the way the United States had structured the rule damaged the interests of Canadian producers. In response USDA made the rule more detailed.
Plaintiffs include 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, and Southwest Meat Association.
A USDA spokeswoman said the department cannot comment on the lawsuit, but that “USDA remains confident that these changes will improve the overall operation of the program and also bring the mandatory COOL requirements into compliance with U.S. international trade obligations.
National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson said the lawsuit was a delaying tactic.
“Time and again, many organizations that represent or are heavily influenced by meatpackers have dragged their feet when it comes to COOL," Johnson said in a statement.
“They prevented COOL from being implemented after the 2002 farm bill, tried to block it following the 2008 farm bill, and now are suing to stop the revised COOL rules from taking effect,” Johnson said. “Such delaying and stalling tactics only serve to deprive their customers of important information about the products they buy.”
“The United States is not the first country to require COOL, and it is popular with the general public,” Johnson added. “Other countries have implemented COOL. In fact, as of 2007, Canada and 47 other countries had either enacted or were planning to establish COOL. A 2008 Consumer Reports poll found that 95 percent of consumers believe that processed or packaged food should be labeled by country of origin and that country of origin should always be available at point of purchase.”
