Beyond the border dispute, U.S. beef producers face other sticky issues. Among them, litigation over mandatory checkoff program. This week, another ruling in this ongoing case was rendered.
This week, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a 2002 lower court ruling that the mandatory beef checkoff program violates the First Amendment rights of cattle producers and, therefore, is unconstitutional. The appellate court also upheld the lower court's decision that the collection of the mandatory fees should stop.
Wayne Watkinson: "The First Amendment issue in each of these cases is really the one that's the hottest topic right now."
Wayne Watkinson is an attorney for a Washington D.C. law firm which represents nearly a dozen commodity checkoff programs. He claims the constitutionality of the assessments is likely to be challenged.
Wayne Watkinson: "Producers are a pretty independent lot. Anytime you require producers to do something there will be some who will not want to do it. So I don't know if you can ever get away from litigation. I do think that with some decisions from the Supreme Court it will stabilize these programs so they understand exactly what they need to do to operate without being subject to First Amendment arguments."
Several other commodity checkoff programs have landed in the courtroom over alleged violations of the First Amendment. A similar case involving the pork checkoff is before the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, where a decision is expected soon.
Other cases have gone all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. But the high court hasn't always ruled to strike down the checkoffs. In 2001, the Supreme Court ruled that the mushroom checkoff violated producers' First Amendment rights by forcing them to pay for messages with which they didn't agree. But the high court sustained a checkoff program for fruit trees.