June 6, 2007
Oral Argument Slated for July in BSE Litigation
Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA has been informed that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) will hear oral argument on July 13 in Portland, Ore., in the organization’s litigation against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the agency’s Final Rule on “Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE); Minimal-Risk Regions and Importation of Commodities,” originally issued on Dec. 29, 2004.
“This in another procedural step in the court process,” said R-CALF USA CEO President/Region VI Director Max Thornsberry, a Missouri veterinarian who chairs the organization’s animal health committee.
“It’s an opportunity for R-CALF’s attorneys to make an oral presentation to the court and to answer questions that arose as 9th Circuit judges were reviewing the briefs we filed in this case,” he said. “R-CALF is hopeful that after oral arguments in July, the 9th Circuit will remand our case back to the District Court of Montana. If so, that will set the stage for a long-sought victory.
“Since 2005, R-CALF members and supporters have stood firm and faithful in their belief that until Canada has its BSE problem under control, imports of Canadian cattle and beef should be halted,” Thornsberry continued. “We owe our sincerest gratitude to our members and the U.S. live cattle industry for the overwhelming support and donations that enabled us to continue this fight on their behalf.
“R-CALF stated in 2005 that USDA should not place the health and welfare of both the U.S. cattle herd and U.S. consumers at risk, and we also pointed out that if USDA relaxed our health and safety import standards by reopening the Canadian border, such a move could threaten U.S. beef exports,” Thornsberry noted. “USDA’s actions have undermined our ability to resume previous levels of beef exports, particularly exports to markets in Asia.
“Litigation has always been our last resort, but we are thankful for the system of checks and balances in this country that will afford us the opportunity to challenge our government when we believe government actions will harm our industry,” he commented.
“Our nation’s import standards should be based on preventing the introduction of foreign animal diseases instead of the management of such diseases once they’re here,” Thornsberry emphasized. “Our import standards should not be relaxed simply because USDA wants to create a North American cattle herd instead of placing value on the distinct and unique characteristics of the U.S. cattle herd.”
Background: USDA initially planned to reopen the Canadian border to imports of live cattle under 30 months of age and beef products from cattle of all ages, but under pressure from an R-CALF USA lawsuit and public concerns about new BSE cases in Canada, USDA voluntarily limited its plans to include only beef from cattle younger than 30 months of age. Canadian imports were set to resume on March 7, 2005, but on March 2, 2005, the U.S. District Court – District of Montana (District Court) granted R-CALF USA its request for a preliminary injunction that prevented the border from reopening.
After oral argument before a 9th Circuit three-judge panel on July 13, 2005, the preliminary injunction was lifted and the Canadian border reopened to such cattle and beef on July 18, 2005. The District Court concluded that the issues in the case already had been decided in the preliminary injunction proceeding and dismissed R-CALF USA’s subsequent motion for summary judgment, requested by the organization on Jan. 6, 2006. In June 2006, R-CALF USA directors voted to appeal this decision. USDA attempted to derail R-CALF USA’s appeal using an unconventional Motion for Summary Affirmance. In a Nov. 14, 2006, order, the 9th Circuit authorized R-CALF USA to proceed with its appeal, stating that R-CALF USA’s arguments “…are sufficiently substantial to warrant further argument.” R-CALF USA filed its final written brief with the 9th Circuit on April 19, 2007.