Taking Ag-Gag to Court
What Are “Ag-Gag” Laws?
As the name suggests, “Ag-Gag” laws seek to “gag” would-be whistleblowers and undercover activists by punishing them for recording and disseminating footage of what goes on in animal agriculture. They were originally designed to prevent the public from learning about animal cruelty. More recently, as is the case in North Carolina and Arkansas, states are passing laws which not only criminalize whistleblowing in agricultural facilities but any private business, including hospitals, elder care facilities, veteran care facilities, and schools.
Why Are Ag-Gag Laws Harmful?
The ability to investigate, document, and publicize corporate agriculture’s abuses is imperative both to the well-being of animals across the nation—and to our own health and safety.
Factory farms want to keep their cruel practices hidden from the public, but the public deserves the truth about the billions of animals suffering on industrial farms and whether laws are being broken, jeopardizing food safety, workers’ rights, and environmental standards.
Undercover investigations have revealed severe animal abuse on factory farms—animals beaten, kicked, maimed, and thrown.
Investigations have also brought to light ammonia and pink slime in hamburgers, antibiotic-resistant “superbugs,” chickens abandoned by the thousands to starve to death, pregnant and nursing pigs held in gestation crates too small for them to stand or turn around, and sick and downed cows dragged on the ground before they become lunchmeat.
- View our Ag-Gag timeline for an overview of the Animal Legal Defense Fund’s work on this important issue.
History of Ag-Gag Laws
Ag-Gag laws emerged in the early 1990s, with Kansas being the first state to pass legislation that made it illegal for someone to take undercover footage in a private farm with the intent to damage its business. Montana and North Dakota passed similar laws the following year.
As of August 2017, six other states have passed their own versions of Ag-Gag laws, bringing the total number of Ag-Gag states states to eight or nine (depending on how you classify them):
- Arkansas (A. K. 16-118-113) (created by HB 1665)
- Kansas (K. S. A. 47-1825 to 1830)
- Montana (MCA 81-30-101 to 81-30-105)
- North Dakota (ND ST 12.1-21.1-01 to 05)
- Iowa (I. C. 717A.3A)
- Missouri (V.A.M.S. 578.405 to 578.412)
- Utah (U.C.A. 1953 76-6-112)
- North Carolina (N.C.G.S.A. 99A-2)
- Wyoming (W. S. 1977 6-3-414) does not have an Ag-Gag law per se—it imposes penalties for gathering resource data information—but the practical effect is to criminalize undercover recording operations.
Wins in Idaho and Utah: Ag-Gag is Unconstitutional
In August 2015, a federal district court in Idaho struck down the state’s Ag-Gag law as unconstitutional under the First Amendment, a significant victory for the plaintiffs, Animal Legal Defense Fund, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho and a large coalition of environmental and civil rights organizations.
The state legislature had enacted the law after an undercover investigation revealed rampant cruelty at an Idaho dairy farm. Drafted by the Idaho Dairyman’s Association, the law essentially criminalized investigative journalism, barring investigators from gaining access to dairy farms. The law also made it a crime for long-time employees to document animal suffering or abuse they observed on the job.
In July 2017, the U.S. District Court of Utah ruled the Utah Ag-Gag statue was unconstitutional. The lawsuit was filed by the Animal Legal Defense Fund and the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) after an activist, Amy Meyer, was prosecuted for filming a sick cow being pushed by a frontloader at a meatpacking company in Draper, Utah. Ms. Meyer was the first person in the country to be prosecuted under an Ag-Gag statute.
- Idaho – Download the complaint (PDF)
- Utah – Download the complaint (PDF)
- Utah – Download the plaintiffs’ opposition to motion to dismiss (PDF)
- Utah – Download the court’s order on motion to dismiss (PDF)
On January 13, 2016, ALDF and a coalition of animal protection, consumer rights, food safety, and whistleblower protection organizations filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the North Carolina law (codified at N.C. Gen. Stat. § 99A-2), which went into effect on January 1, 2016. The law provides for a civil cause of action against whistleblowers who seek to inform the public about matters of public concern in their workplace. This law will deter whistleblowers in facilities like nursing homes, hospitals, day cares, schools, and animal agriculture from reporting concerning or illegal conduct. The law was opposed by major national organization such as the AARP and veterans’ groups. Governor Pat McCrory vetoed the bill only to be overridden by the NC legislature.
In May 2017, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit challenging the North Carolina Ag-Gag law on the grounds that the coalition failed to demonstrate injury and thus lacked standing. The Animal Legal Defense Fund strongly disagrees with the ruling which, in effect, requires whistleblowers to risk jail and significant fines before the law can be contested. Download the complaint (PDF)
Environmentalists, animal advocates, academics, and the press filed a federal lawsuit (PDF) challenging two Wyoming laws which chill free speech and punish people who collect data on open land (codified at Wyoming Statutes § 6-3-414 and § 40-26-101). ALDF represents some of the environmental groups in the litigation because the Wyoming laws prevent private citizens and citizen groups from discovering harmful practices and conditions on federal, state, and private property, and communicating evidence of those practices and conditions to the appropriate federal and state authorities. These laws impose criminal and civil liability on persons who enter open public or private land without specific permission to collect “resource data”-whether it be pictures of noxious weeds, samples of polluted water, videos of injured animals, or even notes on the landscape-and then communicate that data to a federal or state government agency. Although these laws are not Ag-Gag laws in the traditional sense because they target resource data collection, the practical effect of the laws is to also criminalize undercover recording operations. The Wyoming law, like other Ag-Gag laws, has the effect of turning agricultural whistleblowers like undercover investigators or journalists into criminals.
- Sign the petition to stop Ag-Gag.
- Read a message from our executive director on the importance of fighting Ag-Gag.
- Landmark ag gag lawsuit fights threat to freedom of speech.
- The Atlantic Takes on Ag-Gag.
- ALDF’s Stephen Wells on Ag-Gag in Huffington Post.
- Tell your Facebook friends about ALDF’s efforts to stop Ag-Gag.
- Tweet to your Twitter followers about ALDF’s efforts to stop Ag-Gag.
Spread the Word
- Download our Factory Farms & “Ag-Gag” Laws brochure (PDF), and distribute copies in your doctor’s office, vet’s office, cafe, or anywhere that literature can be distributed.