National Pork Producers Council v. Ross
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of National Pork Producers Council v. Ross.
The case National Pork Producers Council v. Ross challenged California's Proposition 12, which restricts the sale of pork from pigs confined in a manner deemed cruel. The National Pork Producers Council and the American Farm Bureau Federation argued that the law burdens interstate commerce. The Ninth Circuit's decision to dismiss the case was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross.
The Court held that the judgment of the Ninth Circuit is affirmed.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Commerce Clause is relevant to National Pork Producers Council v. Ross
The case involves a challenge to a state law based on its impact on interstate commerce, which is central to the Court's analysis.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)alleging that Proposition 12 violates the U. S. Constitution by impermissibly burdening interstate commerce.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in National Pork Producers Council v. Ross that support the summary and concepts above.
Proposition 12 forbids the in-state sale of whole pork meat that comes from breeding pigs confined in a cruel manner.
Petitioners alleged that Proposition 12 violates the U.S. Constitution by impermissibly burdening interstate commerce.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the case.
