Association des Eleveurs de Canards et d'Oies du Quebec v. Becerra

870 F.3d 1140 (2017)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

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…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership