-
Physicians Urge Arizona to Ban Medical Gag Clauses and Enable Private Lawsuits
-
China Extends Tariff Suspension on US Imports to Stabilize Trade Ties
-
New Campaign Highlights Knowledge Gaps on Carbon Monoxide Safety Among Americans
-
JR East Launches 'teppay' to Integrate Suica Balance with Mobile Payments
-
GoodData.AI Launches the Agentic Serving Plane, a New Category of Enterprise Data Infrastructure for AI Agents
-
Securitas Healthcare Introduces a New Era of RTLS Built for the Future of Healthcare Operations
-
US Government Questions Effectiveness of Waymo’s School Bus Software Fix
-
First-time boat buyers advised to assess full ownership costs
-
Panthers expected to begin 2027 NRL season away from new stadium
-
Planning and preparation can reduce stress of interstate relocation
-
Sweet As app launches restaurant discovery platform
-
Two more arrested in Carrie Mullane suspected murder investigation
-
MLA seeks inquiry into reported sectarian gestures on Ormeau Road
-
Mayo school appeals for information after convent and chapel vandalism
-
Louise O’Reilly attacks Simon Harris over unemployment remarks
-
GLP-1 Users Show Higher Rates of Nail Detachment in New Studies
-
Virginia overwhelms Arkansas 91-72 behind balanced scoring
-
Canadian soldier Aidan Goulding remembered at Vancouver funeral
-
Second major storm brings destructive winds and outages to British Columbia
-
Tayyab Arif hits 57 on Pakistan Test debut against Sri Lanka
-
Godzilla Minus Zero leads North American box office with $31.6m
-
Robert Trujillo discusses literacy and social justice children’s books
Supreme Court ponders the fate of pigs, high cost of bacon
A California law aimed at reducing animal suffering on pig farms led to some unusual exchanges Tuesday in the US Supreme Court.
Following a grassroots referendum, California passed an animal welfare measure in 2018 that bans the sale of pork from pigs that were raised in overly confined spaces.
The pork industry had gone to court accusing California -- which produces little of the pork it consumes -- of restricting interstate commerce and trying to impose its values on other US states.
The sector fears that California will effectively set national standards for conditions in which farm animals, including cows and chickens, are kept, thus raising ham and bacon prices for consumers.
Pork producers, after being rejected by state courts, turned to the Supreme Court, which seemed baffled by the case.
For nearly two hours, the nine justices pondered the criteria that would allow comparable cases to be resolved in the future.
The result was a series of highly political hypothetical scenarios.
Progressive Justice Elena Kagan wondered what would happen if Democratic states banned the sale of goods made by non-unionized workers.
Her conservative colleague Amy Coney Barrett imagined that they would ban goods from companies that did not fund medical care for their transgender employees.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, meanwhile, speculated that Republican states might ban products created by undocumented immigrants.
Perplexity peaked when Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that the pork market was already regulated.
"We have marketed already pork marked as organic, crate-free, antibiotic-free and beta-agonist free," she said. "I have no idea what that means, but I know it's there. I've seen it in supermarkets."
The high court will return a decision before June 30.
M.Carneiro--PC