In a carefully reasoned, 29-page decision, Chief U.S. District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill struck down, as unconstitutional, an “Ag-Gag” statute that, according to the court, had been drafted for the express purpose of shielding Idaho’s agricultural and dairy industries “from undercover investigators and whistleblowers who expose the agricultural industry to ‘the court of public opinion.'”
“Under the law,” the decision explains, “a journalist or animal rights investigator can be convicted for not disclosing his media or political affiliations when requesting a tour of an industrial feedlot, or applying for employment at a dairy farm. An employee can be convicted for videotaping animal abuse or life-threatening safety violations at an agricultural facility without first obtaining the owner’s permission.” The offender not only faces up to one year in prison, but could be ordered to pay twice the economic loss an owner suffered as a result of publication of the video even if its content was true.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund (ADLF) and several other organizations, including the ACLU, filed the federal lawsuit and moved for summary judgment, alleging that the Idaho “Ag-Gag” statute violated both the First Amendment right to free speech and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The court agreed, expressly noting that “agricultural…operations that affect food and worker safety are not exclusively a private matter” and that the right to free speech includes the ability to rely upon audio and visual recording…
As Judge Winmill observed, “Upton Sinclair provides a clear illustration of how the First Amendment is implicated by the statute. Sinclair, in order to gather information for his novel, The Jungle, misrepresented his identity so he could get a job at a meatpacking plant in Chicago.”
The novel not only exposed dangerous, unsafe and unsanitary conditions in that industry but led to the 1906 passage of the federal Meat Inspection Act and the Drug Act.
First Amendment rights, the court noted, are not limited to speaking about what one may observe occurring at an agricultural operation, but to recording as well:
This issue is by no means limited to Idaho. A similar ALDF legal challenge to a Utah “Ag-Gag” statute is still pending, and in North Carolina, a Republican-controlled legislature voted to override Republican Governor Pat McCrory’s veto of a nearly identical “Ag-Gag” law.
Stay tuned!
Good decision !
Thanks for the post Ernie.
It’s pretty crazy. As the article says, that woman in Utah was on public property when she took the pictures. I’m sure she was excited about this ruling.
So the GOP wants to “get the government off our backs” and put corporations on them.
What the Sadist-protectors fail to recognize, is that there are already more than enough videos and pictures in circulation for activists to put on banners for the next 100 years, from every state, from near every locality – and that these images will be more powerful next to the heading “taking pictures like this is now illegal”
Thanks for an article that I can read! Almost everything on BradBlog these days is a clip to listen to, which I find inconvenient. I understand why the shift has happened, and hope it brings in a new audience, but I prefer good old fashioned text to get my information most of the time.
Randy D. –
Appreciate the comment and thank you for understanding. Right now, it’s necessary for me to be able to survive. After I get better and/or more efficient and/or collect more resources for the daily radio program, I hope to have more time to write more articles again.
But, I gotta survive. So, that’s where we are at the moment. Appreciate, as noted, your understanding and support (where possible) until then!