A preliminary injunction to halt the implementation of country-of-origin labeling rules on meat packages has been denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed by the American Meat Institute on behalf of a number of industry groups, the lawsuit argued the U.S. Department of Agriculture labeling standards violated free speech and served no benefit. Tyson Foods Inc., a global meat producer based in Springdale, is among the companies opposed to the new labeling standards but was not a plaintiff in the case.
Senior Circuit Judge Stephen Williams, one of three judges to hear oral arguments in January, wrote that the argument for an injunction “fails at a key first step.”
“The 2013 rule does not actually ban any element of the production process,” Williams wrote in his opinion for the court. “It simply requires that meat cuts be accurately labeled with the three phases of production named in the statute. It appears that under current practices, meat packers cannot achieve that degree of accuracy with commingled production.
“The necessary changes to production are, to be sure, costly for the packers, but, contrary to AMI’s claim, the new rule does not ‘force segregated handling of animals with varying geographic histories,’ except in the sense that compliance with any regulation may induce changes in unregulated production techniques that a profit-seeking producer would not otherwise make.”
Industry groups, including the American Association of Meat Processors, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, Canadian Pork Council, Confedaracion Nacional de Organizaciones Ganaderas, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Pork ProducersCouncil, North American Meat Association and the Southwest Meat Association, joined the American Meat Institute in seeking the injunction.
“We disagree strongly with the court’s decision and believe that the rule will continue to harm livestock producers and the industry with little benefit to consumers,” American Meat Institute interim President and CEO James H. Hodges said in a statement.
“At this point we are evaluating our options moving forward.”
A spokesman for the industry organization declined to say what options were being considered.
Country-of-origin labeling rules went into effect in November, six months after being set by the USDA.
The lawsuit sought to halt “costly and detailed labels on meat products that do not directly advance a government interest.”
Labeling rules exceeded “the scope of statutory mandate” and were arbitrary because it “imposes vast burdens on the industry with little to no countervailing benefit,” according to the filing.
Companies are required to specify the country or countries where the livestock used was born, raised and slaughtered.
Opponents of the rule felt it raised production prices unnecessarily and could cost the industry $47.3 million to implement.
Tyson has publicly opposed the rule, but the company did not offer an official reaction to the injunction denial.
“Since this is an industry issue and AMI filed the suit, we think it’s best if you contact them for comment,” a Tyson spokesman said, declining further comment.
In October, Tyson stopped making direct purchases of cattle from Canada as a result of the rule change.
“Like many others in the North American beef industry, we’re very disappointed by the changes made in the U.S. country of origin labeling rules,” a statement issued by Tyson in October read.
“These new rules significantly increase costs because they require additional product codes, production breaks and product segregation, including a separate category for cattle shipped directly from Canada to U.S. beef plants without providing any incremental value to our customers.”
Business, Pages 27 on 03/29/2014