Egg farmer William Cramer was once again dismissed on Wednesday when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the earlier decision of a lower court to toss out Cramer’s lawsuit.
Cramer’s lawsuit challenged California’s Proposition 2, a law which bans inhumane caging of egg-laying hens, breeding pigs, and veal calves, saying the language in the proposition was too vague. The law “prohibits the confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.”
Cramer is not alone in disputing the law—this is the third time the courts have thrown out similar lawsuits brought by egg farmers since its approval in 2008.
Why are many farmers upset by the law? Due to the vagueness of the wording, some farmers have argued they risk spending money on new cages without assurance the new cages will follow the statute, because the statute does not contain a precise description of proper cage size.
Is the language unconstitutionally vague? Comment below.