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 Vermont House has passed a state law requiring mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms. Maine just passed a similar law out of the House Agricultural Committee. Washington State’s I-522, a citizens’ initiative to label GMOs, seems certain to pass in November. Almost equally certain, the big junk food manufacturers aren’t likely to spend millions to defeat I-522, as they did last year to defeat California’s GMO labeling initiative, Prop 37.
So what’s Monsanto to do? The buzz around Washington D.C. is that the biotech bully will try to slip a rider or amendment into the 2013 Farm Bill that would preempt or nullify any state GMO labeling law. The first such amendment, the King Amendment, has already been inserted into the House version of the Farm Bill. Surely Congress won't let corporations wipe out our 225-year old right to enact state laws. Right?
Kind of irrelevant as the Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue in Hunt v. Washington State.
For those that don't know this case it revolved around apples grown in Washington which were far higher than FDA standards.
North Carolina tried to require that the washington apples be labled according to FDA standards and not indicate they were of a higher grade, to help North Carolina growers.
The Court ruled that a State cannot put limitations on labeling done by other states. Since Monsanto products travel across State lines it is covered under the commerce clause which falls directly under the authority of Congress.
Per the Supremecy Clause in the Constitution, and subsequently the Supreme Court ruling in the washington case, States will have absolutely no authority to determine labeling laws for products.
I'm surprised Monsanto doesn't have lawyers who know this.
Originally posted by Hopechest
Kind of irrelevant as the Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue in Hunt v. Washington State.
For those that don't know this case it revolved around apples grown in Washington which were far higher than FDA standards.
North Carolina tried to require that the washington apples be labled according to FDA standards and not indicate they were of a higher grade, to help North Carolina growers.
The Court ruled that a State cannot put limitations on labeling done by other states. Since Monsanto products travel across State lines it is covered under the commerce clause which falls directly under the authority of Congress.
Per the Supremecy Clause in the Constitution, and subsequently the Supreme Court ruling in the washington case, States will have absolutely no authority to determine labeling laws for products.
I'm surprised Monsanto doesn't have lawyers who know this.
Originally posted by Nephalim
Originally posted by Hopechest
Kind of irrelevant as the Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue in Hunt v. Washington State.
For those that don't know this case it revolved around apples grown in Washington which were far higher than FDA standards.
North Carolina tried to require that the washington apples be labled according to FDA standards and not indicate they were of a higher grade, to help North Carolina growers.
The Court ruled that a State cannot put limitations on labeling done by other states. Since Monsanto products travel across State lines it is covered under the commerce clause which falls directly under the authority of Congress.
Per the Supremecy Clause in the Constitution, and subsequently the Supreme Court ruling in the washington case, States will have absolutely no authority to determine labeling laws for products.
I'm surprised Monsanto doesn't have lawyers who know this.
Ok, let me see if I have this right. A state cannot put limitations on other states packages, but it can put limitations on its own? But even then, the congress auto retains the right of commerce.
So then, basically only congress can decide what goes into and out of a state anyway and how its labeled. Am i understanding that right?
Originally posted by Nephalim
See thats where its get confusing for me.
Right, If congress gets its authority from the people, and the people are saying to label this way or that.. how do the states and the people not have this authority?edit on 17-5-2013 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)
It was a money issue but it is irrelevant as far as the Statute goes. The ruling would still apply.
And I am all for labeling of GMO foods, I'm not defending them whatsoever.
I was simply stating the legal aspect of it. Anything a State passes will be declared unconstitutional under the supremecy clause.