• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Ranchers.net

February 15, 2010



U.S. District Court Upholds COOL; Implications for Canada’s and Mexico’s WTO COOL Complaints



Billings, Mont. – In a memorandum sent Friday to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), R-CALF USA explained that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington (Court) recently issued an order that addresses a principal argument contained in the complaints filed at the World Trade Organization (WTO) against the U.S. country-of-origin labeling (COOL) law by Canada and Mexico. The order stems from the lawsuit that Easterday Ranches Inc. (Easterday) filed against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the U.S. COOL law.



In that litigation, Easterday argued that the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s marking rules, established to implement the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), provide that beef derived from the slaughter of imported cattle in the U.S. market is entitled to be designated as a product of the USA. Easterday further argued that as a result of these preexisting marking rules (NAFTA marking rules), the COOL law improperly requires beef from such imported cattle to be labeled as a product of both countries – Canada and the United States.



The Court disagreed. In its Feb. 5, 2010, order the Court found that the COOL law can coexist with, and does not repeal, the preexisting NAFTA marking rules because these rules are for purposes of tariff designation in a customs setting, while the COOL law applies to retail products, and because the COOL statute neither covers the whole subject matter of the NAFTA marking rules nor does the COOL law present an irreconcilable conflict with those rules.



“We believe this U.S. Court decision will help in the defense of our COOL law against Canada’s and Mexico’s attack at the WTO,” said R-CALF USA COOL Committee Chair Mike Schultz.



“Much like the Easterday complaint filed in the U.S., both Canada’s and Mexico’s complaints filed at the WTO are seeking the same protection,” he continued. “And like Easterday, Canada and Mexico want to continue hiding the true origins of their foreign beef in the U.S. marketplace.



“The actions by Canada and Mexico truly are repugnant to U.S. consumers who deserve to know the origins of their food and whose government – our U.S. government – has passed a law under our U.S. Constitution to give those consumers the right to know where their food is grown and produced,” Schultz added.



R-CALF USA’s memorandum states the group is hopeful that this Court decision will help USTR in its defense of COOL at the WTO. The memorandum states that the U.S. Court’s sound reasoning in opposition to Easterday’s argument, based on the NAFTA marking rules, should likewise apply to any international authority cited by Canada and Mexico “in their ongoing effort to mask the origins beef derived from their respective country’s cattle.”



“Canada and Mexico should immediately drop their complaints at the WTO before they further damage the integrity and reputation of their respective cattle industries,” Schultz concluded. “It is indefensible for these foreign countries’ cattle producers to assert that U.S. consumers do not deserve to know the true origins of the beef that they feed their families.”
Top