A federal appeals court
judge on Thursday struck down provisions of Idaho’s “ag-gag” law meant to
criminalize videotape recording at agricultural facilities, saying the law
suppresses free speech.
The decision is a victory for
the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), which sued Idaho in 2014, and could set a
legal precedent. The group currently has similar lawsuits pending in Iowa and
North Carolina. Other states with ag-gag laws on the books include
Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas and Missouri.
Like the Idaho law, Utah’s also
has been struck down in
federal court.
“The Ninth Circuit’s decision
sends a strong message to Idaho and other states with ag-gag laws that they
cannot trample civil liberties for the benefit of an industry,” said Animal
Legal Defense Fund Executive Director Stephen Wells.
Idaho enacted its law in 2014
after Mercy for Animals released video footage showing alleged abuses at an
Idaho dairy farm. ALDF sued and won the following year. Idaho appealed, arguing
that lying to gain access to a farm or slaughterhouse and then secretly
recording its operations constitutes action, not protected free speech.
But the appeals court sided
with ALDF’s argument that Idaho’s trespass laws already protect farmers. The
court called the ag-gag law overly broad and said it was “in large part,
targeted at speech and investigative journalists.”
The court concluded that “Idaho
is singling out for suppression one mode of speech — audio and video recordings
of agricultural operations — to keep controversy and suspect practices out of
the public eye.”