The lawsuit over the beef checkoff seeks to freeze all existing beef checkoff assets and to establish an escrow account for those assets and for future checkoff payments, pending the outcome of the case. Ranchers and CIF File Brief in Support of Preliminary Injunction in Beef Checkoff Lawsuit

Attorneys for Jeanne and Steve Charter in Montana and the Center for Individual Freedom (CIF) filed a brief on October 12, 2001, in support of their motion for preliminary injunction in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the mandatory beef promotion program.

The 40-page brief, submitted in U.S. District Court in Billings, Montana, responds to the government's brief, filed on September 21, 2001, which argues against a preliminary injunction and puts forth a novel argument that the checkoff-funded speech occurring in mandatory commodity advertising programs is, in fact, government speech that is not subject to the First Amendment.

Here’s an excerpt from the Charter’s brief:

"Shamelessly exhuming arguments laid to rest in United Foods, and offering a new defense of checkoff programs that has never been accepted by any appellate court, the government pretends that there is no significant First Amendment issue in this case. But quite to the contrary, the beef checkoff program plainly violates the First Amendment under the analysis dictated by United Foods and under the government’s own representations before the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the government's new government-speech defense is incorrect both in its characterization of the program and in its assumption that government speech is immune from the First Amendment scrutiny applicable to other forms of compelled support for speech…"

To download the full brief in support of motion for preliminary injunction, click here.

The lawsuit over the beef checkoff seeks to freeze all existing beef checkoff assets and to establish an escrow account for those assets and for future checkoff payments, pending the outcome of the case. In addition, the suit seeks a refund of past compelled payments, should the program be declared unconstitutional. Since earlier briefs in the case were filed on August 7, 2001, more than 130 independent cattle producers and nine organizations have requested permission to intervene in the lawsuit on the Charter’s behalf.

The suit follows the June 25 ruling by the US Supreme Court in United States v. United Foods, that it violates the First Amendment for the government to compel mushroom producers to pay for industry advertising.

CIF filed an amicus (friend of the court) brief in the United Foods case, as well as in a case in the California Supreme Court involving mandatory advertising for plum growers (Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Veneman). The California case was remanded to the lower court and is still pending.

For a history of the ranchers' struggle with the Beef Checkoff program, click here.

 

November 1, 2001
[About CFIF]  [Freedom Line]  [Legal Issues]  [Legislative Issues]  [We The People]  [Donate]  [Home]  [Search]  [Site Map]
� 2000 Center For Individual Freedom, All Rights Reserved. CFIF Privacy Statement
Designed by Wordmarque Design Associates
Conservative NewsConservative editorial humorPolitical cartoons Conservative Commentary Conservative Issues Conservative Editorial Conservative Issues Conservative Political News Conservative Issues Conservative Newsletter Conservative Internships Conservative Internet Privacy Policy How To Disable Cookies On The Internet