Association des Eleveurs de Canards et d'Oies du Quebec v. Becerra
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
870 F.3d 1140 (2017)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
In 2004 California passed California Health and Safety Code § 25982, which prohibited in-state sales of livers from force-fed birds. The legislature found that the force-feeding process to produce foie gras, i.e., fatty livers, was inhumane. The Association des Eleveurs de Canards et d’Oies du Quebec, Hudson Valley Foie Gras, and Hot’s Restaurant Group (collectively, the associations) (plaintiffs) sued California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (defendant) in federal district court. The associations argued that § 25982 violated the Due Process and Commerce Clauses in the United States Constitution. The district court dismissed the case. The associations refiled their complaint, alleging that § 25982 was preempted by the Poultry Products Inspection Act (the inspection act). The associations alleged that § 25982 was expressly preempted because the inspection act prohibited states from imposing additional or different poultry-ingredient requirements. The associations alleged that § 25982 was also implicitly preempted for two reasons. (1) The inspection act had excusive governance in the field of raising poultry for food consumption. (2) Section 25982 contravened the inspection act’s purpose of ensuring that poultry products were wholesome and marked, labeled, and packaged appropriately. The district court found § 25982 was expressly preempted. The district court granted the associations’ summary-judgment motion and enjoined the provision’s enforcement. The matter was appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Nguyen, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.