Monday, July 25, 2005

A strong opinion

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has issued its opinion on the cattle injunction - and it doesn't leave much room for discussion:
The high court said Cebull should have respected the judgment and expertise of the agriculture department about safety risks instead of blithely accepting the word of R-CALF.

R-CALF, said the three judges, didn't show a likelihood of success on the merits of its case, which centred on arguments that Canadian cattle pose extensive risks to U.S. herds and human health, as well as "irreparable economic harm."

"The record does not support the district court's alarmist findings (of harm) from the stigma of Canadian beef will actually befall the American beef industry," said the Court of Appeals...

"Instead of evaluating the (mad cow) safeguards as part of a larger system, the district court parsed the regulations and faulted USDA for any risk that a given step failed to remove," said the opinion.

R-CALF doesn't want to give up, but it's tough to see how there could be any merit to a hearing on a permanent injunction at this point.

(I'll keep an eye out for an HTML copy of the opinion for further commentary - drop a comment if you spot one.)

No comments:

Post a Comment