Last week a federal appeals court lifted the voter-approved corporate farming ban in Nebraska on the grounds that it interfered with interstate commerce. Nebraska has decided to challenge the ruling at take its case to the Supreme Court. From the Sioux City Journal:
he state will take its chances with the U.S. Supreme Court in its effort to keep a voter-approved ban on corporate farming alive.
Last week a panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the nearly 25-year-old ban on corporate farms, upholding an earlier federal district court decision. The appeals court said the ban violates the federal commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution and unfairly burdens out-of-state economic interests.
Attorney General Jon Bruning had considered asking the entire 8th Circuit Court to rehear the case, but instead chose to appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court, which he described as "our best option at this point."
"Nebraskans voted to add Initiative 300 to our state constitution because family farms are an important part of our heritage," Bruning said Monday in a news release. "It's our job to defend the amendment, and that's what we'll do."
The case stems from a lawsuit filed by ranchers who argued that the ban prevented them from setting up corporations to keep their operations within their family or from combining resources with neighbors to control costs, among other things.
Passed by voters in 1982, the constitutional amendment generally prohibits corporations and certain other business entities from owning farmland or engaging in agricultural activity, although there are numerous exceptions.
Previous appeals have faced difficulties. In 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a decision declaring South Dakota's ban on corporate farming unconstitutional. That ruling, also from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, said South Dakota's Amendment E was unconstitutional because it interfered with interstate commerce.
Recent Comments