The Supreme Court said Monday it could not get involved in a dispute over a California animal cruelty law that bans foie gras from being sold in the state, leaving open a lower court ruling that dismissed the case.
Foie gras is made from the enlarged livers of force-fed ducks and geese, and animal welfare groups supported the law. As usual, the court did not comment on the refusal to hear the case, and it was among many the court said Monday it will not hear.
The law does not completely prohibit Californians from eating foie gras in the state. The courts have already decided that residents can still order foie gras from out-of-state producers and have it shipped to them. Restaurants and retailers are still prohibited from selling it or giving it away, however.
The foie gras case is on hold at the high court while judges consider a separate case involving another California animal cruelty law, which governs the sale of pork in the state. In that case, the judges earlier this month supports that law, which requires more space for breeding pigs. The pork industry says the ruling will lead to higher costs nationwide for pork chops and bacon.
California’s foie gras law, however, predates the pork law and took effect in July 2012. It states: “A product may not be sold in California if it is the result of force-feeding a bird for the purpose of enlargement of the bird’s liver beyond the normal size.”
Farmers and producers of poultry products in Canada are being sued over the law along with New York-based Hudson Valley Foie Gras. The case has been ongoing since 2012. Most recently, a trial court dismissed the case and a federal appeals court agreed with that result. The Supreme Court’s decision not to participate left that decision in place.