WASHINGTON -- On Oct. 31, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied a request for a rehearing on a motion for preliminary injunction to block implementation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's May 2013 final rule on country-of-origin labeling for red meat. The request came from the American Meat Institute and other groups.
U.S. Cattlemen's Association President Danni Beer said in an email, "USCA is pleased that once again the U.S. Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of COOL as the court stated today that the request for appeals of the most recent decisions in this case was denied."
The American Meat Institute, which made the rehearing request, said in a statement that it was "disappointed."
"We continue to maintain that the country of origin rule harms livestock producers and the industry and provides little benefit to consumers," AMI said.
"The ban on commingling, which was the subject of this rehearing request, is a key component that made the 2013 rule even more onerous and burdensome than the previous rule, as was confirmed by the World Trade Organization's recent report," said AMI Interim President and CEO James Hodges. "The court's refusal to rehear our motion will allow those harms to continue. We will evaluate our options."
ADVERTISEMENT
AMI noted that it had been joined in the original lawsuit filed in July 2013, by 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 Producers Council, North American Meat Association and the Southwest Meat Association.
USCA and the National Farmers Union also urged Congress to ignore a request sent by farm and trade groups Oct. 30 that Congress pass a measure during the lame duck session to stop implementation of the COOL provisions to which WTO objects.
"The requests and stated timeline included in the letter regarding proposed retaliatory tariffs is simply off-base," Beer said. "The protocol that must be followed to propose any tariffs against U.S. goods is a lengthy and precise process; the timeline stated in this letter is extremely optimistic in terms of what the WTO is capable of doing in such a short time frame. USCA remains committed to addressing the WTO ruling and any items of concern within the current COOL law, without congressional intervention."
National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson also urged Congress to ignore the letter because it "was organized by groups who have opposed COOL from day one and demonstrates that they understand they have lost the battle over this issue in the public arena. We urge Congress to ignore the overblown rhetoric of the letter and stay the course on COOL."
Johnson maintained that the WTO ruling said the implementation of the law remains unbalanced between consumer information and production costs and will need further changes.
"The WTO has already ruled that the COOL law is compliant and this ruling shows that USDA's current rule is one more step in the right direction, but may not have gone far enough in providing sufficient information to consumers," he said. "Given the length of the WTO process and the variable outcomes that are possible for COOL, there is no reason for Congress to be stampeded into rash action based on fear mongering."
Johnson noted that the Oct. 31 decision was "the fourth time COOL has won in court."
"COOL became the law of the land because consumers want to know where their food comes from and ranchers and farmers are happy to provide that information," Johnson said. "Congress understood this basic need and passed this common-sense law. We urge the multinational meat industry to drop the senseless litigation and allow the law to be enforced."
