BIG-AG SAGGED: U.S Federal Court agrees Kansas ‘Ag-Gag’ law targeting whistleblowers is unconstitutional
The federal court declared videos, articles, advocacy and public dialogue inspired by whistleblowing and undercover investigations into treatment of animals and the way food was produced was at the core of the First Amendment.
TIM CARPENTER: The U.S. Court of Appeals echoed a lower court by finding a Kansas law applying criminal penalties to people taking jobs at agricultural facilities for the purpose of exposing allegedly unethical treatment of livestock was an unconstitutional violation of First Amendment rights…
Alan Chen, lead counsel for the plaintiffs and a professor of law at the University of Denver, said the appellate decision Thursday was a victory for animal welfare, free speech and transparency in the animal agriculture industry. “Undercover investigations are crucial to keeping people informed about the frequently inhumane conditions in which these animals are kept,” he said…
The 2-1 decision handed down in the federal system’s 10th Circuit also affirmed an injunction forbidding Gov. Laura Kelly and Attorney General Derek Schmidt from enforcing the Kansas Farm Animal and Field Crop and Research Facilities Protection Act. It’s been on the books in Kansas since 1990, but amendments in 2012 enhancing criminal penalties drew the attention of animal-welfare activists and an avalanche of press freedom organizations…
In effect, the federal courts declared in Animal Legal Defense Fund vs. Kelly that Kansas couldn’t legislate speech to silence views critical of animal agriculture. It meant videos, articles, advocacy and public dialogue inspired by whistleblowing and undercover investigations into treatment of animals and the way food was produced was at the core of the First Amendment.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund, a national nonprofit that seeks to expose wrongdoing at animal facilities, worked with the Center for Food Safety and other groups to challenge constitutionality of Kansas’ so-called “ag-gag” law in 2018… Stephen Wells, executive director of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, said “The Tenth Circuit’s decision is a victory for animals throughout the state who are forced into industrial animal agriculture and suffer in secret behind closed doors”…
Schmidt, who sought to upend the lower court’s ruling, said the Kansas law was modified to protect agricultural property rights by deterring people from gaining access to inner workings of cattle, hog or chicken confined feeding operations or slaughterhouses through deception with the intent of harming that business through public disclosure. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEO: