It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The victory by Our Family Farms Coalition is notable in many regards. To start, Jackson County passed its ordinance before agribusiness giants successfully lobbied the Oregon legislature to pass a law banning counties from adopting this form of anti-GMO seed law. In contrast to many other anti-GMO campaigns across the country, Jackson County didn’t focus on requiring food labels to identify GMO ingredients—which federal courts repeatedly have thrown out as violating a food maker’s commercial speech rights. Instead, activists focused on barring the use of GMO seeds in the county, affecting only a few farms, as a way to ensure that crops and seeds produced on many more organic farms were not sullied.
originally posted by: EA006
a reply to: FyreByrd
Its a good start to build on.
Can Monsanto appeal this?
Can you provide an example of a single case where this has occurred?
which federal courts repeatedly have thrown out as violating a food maker’s commercial speech rights
The trouble is, this is a county ordinance, not a state law. The case will be interesting.
It's interesting how idealogy changes (from States rights to Federalism and back) depending upon personal benefit for corporate conservatives.
The plaintiffs interpreted the "right to farm" law as protecting their genetically engineered alfalfa crops from being destroyed.
While Clarke dismissed the alfalfa farmers' arguments regarding "right to farm," their claim seeking $4.2 million in compensation from Jackson County remains alive.
Monsanto is the only producer of GM alfalfa?
Now of course this will be appealed to a 'higher authority' by a 'higher authority (Monsanto)" as big ag can't allow this to stand.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FyreByrd
Can you provide an example of a single case where this has occurred?
which federal courts repeatedly have thrown out as violating a food maker’s commercial speech rights
The trouble is, this is a county ordinance, not a state law. The case will be interesting.
It's interesting how idealogy changes (from States rights to Federalism and back) depending upon personal benefit for corporate conservatives.
The plaintiffs interpreted the "right to farm" law as protecting their genetically engineered alfalfa crops from being destroyed.
While Clarke dismissed the alfalfa farmers' arguments regarding "right to farm," their claim seeking $4.2 million in compensation from Jackson County remains alive.
www.oregonlive.com...
Monsanto is the only producer of GM alfalfa?
Now of course this will be appealed to a 'higher authority' by a 'higher authority (Monsanto)" as big ag can't allow this to stand.
originally posted by: Unity_99
This won't matter, they keep appearing and coming at you, sometimes retrying from a different angle, and sometimes blatantly ignoring the decisions and proceeding as if they won.
I remember the accounts of James Gilliland for example and how he finally became sovereign, through many ordeals.
Just think they need to regroup and plan their next steps in this war.
It will be an interesting case because contitutional law will come into play - Because the Plaintiffs (read big ag) are claiming that "their profit is being taken without compensation" (sounds familier - n'cest pas?) and are refering to the 'taking' . Specifically the 'takings' clause of the 5th amendment to the constitution.
www.oregonlive.com...
Schulz, 51, stands on the family's 250-acre farm, in front of the white house his mom has lived in for 56 years. He points to a white and green house across the road, where his father grew up, and his house a quarter-mile west behind a patch of trees.
Opponents say their livelihoods are under threat. They openly resent the growing influence of organic farmers, many of whom they say are recent California transplants who brought their liberal political activism with them.