US: Meat Institute issues comments on livestock market rules

Published Sep 14, 2024

Tridge summary

The Meat Institute has criticized the USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) for attempting to change the legal standard under the Packers and Stockyards Act without Congressional approval. The Institute argues that this move would lead to increased litigation costs and higher meat prices for consumers, and claims the proposed rule is vague, unconstitutional, and economically flawed. In contrast, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack defends the rule, stating it aims to ensure fairer market practices and lower prices for consumers.

Disclaimer: The above summary was generated by Tridge's proprietary AI model for informational purposes.

Original content

The trade association said it believes the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is attempting to circumvent Congress and the courts to reverse the long-standing legal standard that a plaintiff must prove harm to competition to sue and win under Section 202(a) or (b) of the Packers and Stockyards Act. “This position was wrong before and it is wrong now,” said Mark Dopp, chief operating officer and general counsel of the Meat Institute. Later in its comments, the Meat Institute also stated that it believes the proposed rule violates the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act. “Changing the harm to competition standard requires Congressional intervention and that fact is highlighted by the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA,” Dopp said. “Furthermore, the proposal includes rules so vague that, if adopted, it would be impossible for a regulated entity to know how to comply with them.” Other issues raised by the Meat Institute ...

Source: Agromeat