Wednesday, August 21, 2024


The Right’s War on Cultivated-Meat


 
 August 21, 2024
Facebook

I was excited to see Upside Foods and the Institute of Justice had filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to overturn Florida’s ban on cultivated-meat sales. For those who don’t know, cultivated meat is grown from livestock cells, without slaughter. It offers a number of potential animal welfare, public health and environmental benefits.

Finally, it seemed, the cellular-agriculture field was fighting back against right-wing actors, who, in recent years, have sought to scare the public about an emerging technology for the sake of political gain. Still, as I read more about the lawsuit, again, brought by a cultivated-meat firm and a libertarian non-profit, I felt a little uneasy.

Among other things, the lawsuit argues Florida’s ban violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, which gives federal law priority over state law in certain instances, and the Commerce Clause, which gives the U.S. Congress sole authority to regulate interstate commerce.

I know very little about the law, but this argument reminded me of those used by animal-exploitation industries seeking to invalidate state-level protections for our fellow creatures. For instance, it’s my understanding pork producers seeking to overturn California’s Prop 12 cited the Commerce Clause as well.

Thankfully, the US Supreme Court, conservative as it is, rejected the argument by a narrow vote of 5-4 last year. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, stating, “While the Constitution addresses many weighty issues, the type of pork chops California merchants may sell is not on the list.”

Still, as an uninformed observer, I worry a victory in the cultivated-meat lawsuit might undermine the constitutional basis of pro-animal laws. For instance, California recently passed a ban on fur sales. Would this be in jeopardy if Florida’s law banning the sale of cultivated meat was overturned?

In an effort to answer the question, I reached out to a number of legal experts who were sympathetic to animal rights. The only person who got back to me was Asher Smith, Deputy General Counsel and Director of Litigation at the PETA Foundation. I was thankful for the time he spent answering my queries.

His current cases include actions under the Endangered Species Act against roadside zoos abusively keeping protected animals, constitutional lawsuits on behalf of both animals and humans, and false advertising claims challenging the deceptive marketing of animal products as humane.

Smith began by making clear the objections People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals had to Florida’s cultivated-meat ban. “All it does is help to prop up factory farming interests at the expense of animal welfare,” he said. “Florida’s ban is not supported by any adequate health or safety justification.”

The lawyer continued, noting any giveaway to the meat industry is a vote to increase greenhouse-gas emissions and deforestation, and to increase the intensity of the storms and hurricanes that so frequently ravage Florida’s coasts. For these reasons, PETA supported the lawsuit against the cultivated meat ban.

Smith was not concerned about the case threatening state-level animal protections. He pointed out, after passing the ban earlier this year, Florida officials explained their goal was to fight back against shadowy out-of-state bogeymen, and to protect Florida’s own filthy and cruel factory farms.

“There is no reason that efforts intended to protect human and animal kind from misery and cruelty should be in conflict with constitutional doctrines that would prevent the most overt kind of favoritism to in-state special interests,” Smith said, citing Gorsuch, who recognized the legitimacy of ethically-motivated restrictions.

I might have supported the lawsuit regardless, because I believe the spread of cellular agriculture is the most promising way of reducing the amount of animal suffering and premature death in the world. That said, I hope Smith is correct in his assessment. I don’t want progress for nonhumans in one area to mean regression in another.

Jon Hochschartner is the author of a number of books about animal-rights history, including The Animals’ Freedom FighterIngrid Newkirk, and Puppy Killer, Leave Town. He blogs at SlaughterFreeAmerica.Substack.com.

No comments: