The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has reversed a district court's decision not to apply an abstention that would defer a case on the legality of transporting hemp to state court proceedings. Big Sky Scientific v. Bennetts, No. 19-0040 (9th Cir., entered September 4, 2019). Hemp producers were reportedly hoping to receive guidance from the federal courts on the interpretation of the 2018 Farm Bill and its change in legal status for hemp, which producers began sending across state lines before states established regulatory frameworks for the crop.
Tag Archives Idaho
After secretly filmed footage of an Idaho dairy farm drew national attention and threats against the owners, the Idaho legislature passed a law criminalizing entry, records access and the creation of recordings of agricultural production operations. The Animal Legal Defense Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union and 15 other plaintiffs challenged the law, and a federal district court invalidated it in 2015. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit has held that while two of the law’s provisions are “staggeringly overbroad” restrictions on speech, the other two survive scrutiny and do not violate the First Amendment. Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Wasden, No. 15-35960 (9th Cir., entered January 4, 2018). The panel held that Idaho cannot criminalize misrepresentations made to enter a production facility, partly because the language was overbroad and partly because it was targeted at investigative journalism. “Even assuming Idaho has a compelling interest in regulating property rights and protecting…
Infowars founder Alex Jones has reportedly agreed to retract his statements concerning Chobani LLC's production facility in Twin Falls, Idaho, after Chobani filed a defamation lawsuit. Jones' website published a video asserting that Chobani's Idaho facility, which employs a number of refugees, was linked to a crime and a rise in incidents of tuberculosis. "During the week of April 10, 2017, certain statements were made on the Infowars Twitter feed and YouTube channel regarding Chobani LLC that I now understand to be wrong. The tweets and video have now been retracted, and will not be reposted,” Jones reportedly said. “On behalf of Infowars, I regret that we mischaracterized Chobani, its employees and the people of Twin Falls, Idaho, the way we did." Additional details on the lawsuit appear in Issue 632 of this Update. See Los Angeles Times, May 17, 2017. Issue 635
Chobani LLC has reportedly filed a libel suit against Alex Jones, radio host and founder of Infowars, alleging Jones defamed the company with a report that its Idaho factory was linked to a child sexual assault case and a rise in incidents of tuberculosis. Chobani LLC v. Jones, No. 42171659 (Idaho 5th Jud. D. Ct., filed April 24, 2017). Jones’ Infowars video apparently asserted that Chobani's policy of hiring refugees caused several negative effects in Twin Falls, Idaho, including a sexual assault case involving refugee minors. See Bloomberg and New York Times, April 25, 2017. Issue 632
J.R. Simplot Co. has filed a patent infringement suit against McCain Foods USA, Inc. alleging McCain copied Simplot’s twisted potato fries product, Sidewinders®. J.R. Simplot Co. v. McCain Foods USA, Inc., No. 16-0449 (D. Idaho, filed October 7, 2016). Simplot asserts that its patent, “Spiral Potato Piece,” covers the ornamental features of Sidewinders®, including its “inherently distinctive and nonfunctional” shape, and that side-by-side comparisons indicate “McCain copied Simplot’s patented Sidewinders® design in developing its Twisted Potato products.” Simplot alleges patent and trade dress infringement and seeks damages, an injunction and attorney’s fees. Issue 619
Idahoan Foods LLC has filed a lawsuit against Basic American Inc. alleging the company’s line of potato products marketed under the name “Buttery Home-Style” infringes on Idahoan’s rights to “Buttery Homestyle,” its brand of potato products. Idahoan Foods LLC v. Basic Am. Inc., No. 16-0005 (D. Idaho, filed January 6, 2016). Idahoan’s trademark application to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was filed in May 2015 and remains pending, but the company argues that it has used “Buttery Homestyle” commercially since 2003. Idahoan notified Basic American in December 2015 of its allegedly superior rights to the mark; the complaint asserts that Basic American then filed a lawsuit in California federal court seeking a declaratory judgment that “Buttery Home-Style” does not infringe “Buttery Homestyle.” Idahoan seeks an injunction, destruction of the infringing mark, damages and maturation of its trademark application. Issue 590
An Idaho federal court has invalidated a state law that criminalized undercover investigations at agricultural manufacturing plants, finding that the law criminalized speech in violation of the First Amendment. Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, No. 14-0104 (D. Idaho, order entered August 3, 2015). The 2014 Idaho statute passed after an animal-rights organization publicized a video recorded during an undercover investigation at a dairy. The statute criminalized “interference with agricultural production,” specifically interference by non-employees who obtain access to a facility by trespass or misrepresentation—or employees who obtain employment by misrepresentation—who then create audio or video recordings without the facility owner’s consent or intentionally cause physical damage to facility operations. The Animal Legal Defense Fund challenged the law on First Amendment and Equal Protection grounds soon after it took effect. The court first detailed the legislative history of the bill, noting the intentions of the bill’s drafters—including the “desire to…
A federal court in Idaho has denied, in part, the motion to dismiss filed by state officials in a challenge filed by animal-rights activists and other groups to a law that criminalizes the undercover investigations of agricultural operations. Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Otter, No. 14-0104 (D. Idaho, order entered September 4, 2014). The court agreed to dismiss the governor who lacked enforcement authority under the law and emphasized that its rulings did not address the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims of First Amendment and Equal Protection violations, as well as preemption under three federal laws that protect whistleblowers. According to the court, the law was enacted after Mercy for Animals Dairy released a video of workers abusing cows at an Idaho dairy. The footage had been obtained by an undercover investigator who misrepresented his identity to gain access to the facility and made the audiovisual recordings without the dairy owner’s knowledge…
The University of Denver law professors who filed a challenge to Utah’s law barring audio or video recordings of purported animal abuse in agricultural operations have filed a second challenge to a similar law that recently took effect in Idaho. Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, No. 14-0104 (D. Idaho, filed March 17, 2014). Both lawsuits challenge the so-called “ag-gag” laws on constitutional grounds. Utah’s attorney general has requested that the lawsuit filed in that state in 2013 be dismissed on standing grounds; the issue will be argued on May 15. Filed against the governor on behalf of animal rights organizations, the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Food Safety, journalists, historians, and an “agricultural investigations expert,” the Idaho lawsuit contends that the statute “defines ‘agricultural production facility’ so broadly” that it would apply to “public parks, restaurants, nursing homes, grocery stores, pet stores, and virtually every public accommodation and…
The Idaho Senate has approved a joint memorial bill (S.J.M. 102) that would (i) state legislative findings, including that “taxpayers have a right to expect that their tax dollars will purchase fresh, healthy food that meets nutritional standards that will not contribute to health issues and higher medical costs,” and (ii) urge the federal government “to prohibit the purchase of unhealthy food items with Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.” Introduced on March 19, 2013, the proposal was adopted by voice vote on March 22 and sent to the state House. The bill lists the types of foods that the legislature deems unhealthy, including “energy drinks defined as a beverage containing at least sixty-five milligrams of caffeine per eight fluid ounces that is advertised as being specifically designed to provide metabolic stimulation or an increase to the consumer’s mental or physical energy; a sweetened beverage or ‘soft drink’ defined as…
12
