Ninth Circuit Leave States 'Standing' There With Egg On Their Face

You can’t make an omelet without cracking a couple eggs. In California, you can’t even get those eggs unless the farmers follow the Golden State’s strict Shell Egg Laws.  Egg farmers outside of California are a bit pissed about these laws, trying ever-so-hard to get this law overturn. Six states came together and filed a lawsuit in the Ninth Circuit to challenge the validity of these California’s law. The result was not exactly favorable for these out-of-state farmers.

These Chickens Need Room to Stretch Those Legs

In 2008, California voters adopted a law that stated hens may not be confined for the majority of any day.  In order to be compliant, farmers cannot prevent hens from lying down, standing up, fully extending their limbs, and turning around freely. Two years later, California adopted legislation which mandated that a shelled egg cannot be sold or contract for human consumption in California if the seller knows or should have known that the egg came from a hen that was not housed under these laws.

Missouri got the ball rolling in February 2014 by filing a lawsuit claiming that California’s Shell Egg Law violated the Commerce Clause. The States of Nebraska, Oklahoma, Alabama, and Kentucky and Iowa were later added on as additional plaintiffs because, well, they feared the law, too. Unfortunately, these states failed to qualify the biggest hurdle every lawsuit must clear…standing.

Stop Yawning, Standing Is Dreadful Great

Standing might not be the sexiest ways to have a lawsuit dismissed, but it is highly effective nonetheless.  Heck, some of this country’s landmark cases have been decided strictly on this issue.

The six states advanced several theories on why California’s Shell Egg Laws caused their states injuries in fact. First, the six states allege harm to their egg farmers. Next, they argue that the Shell Egg Laws will cause harmful fluctuations in the price of eggs. Finally, they claim that they will suffer discrimination from the Shell Egg Laws. The three judge panel was hardly convinced in any of the states’ arguments.  The Ninth Circuit ruled that the farmers themselves probably have standing, not the states.  Unless the states can prove actual, not speculative, harm to their states because of these California rules, then this case has no merits to be in front of them.

The Ninth Circuit did, however, provide the states with some wriggle room to bring this action back to court. Although the lower court ruled that this case was dismissed with prejudice, the Ninth reversed that part of the ruling saying that since this is a Subject Matter Jurisdiction issue, it should have dismissed without prejudice. 

While finding a new way to argue standing might be a tall task for these states, we will have to wait and see what eggs-actly happens from here.