Four environmental groups filed a constitutional challenge on Wednesday against recent amendments to North Carolina’s “right-to-farm” laws. The suit takes on two state laws, passed in 2017 and 2018, that limit residents’ ability to file nuisance suits against large-scale livestock farms and the claims that plaintiffs can bring in such suits.
The constitutional challenge will be heard by a three-judge panel appointed by the Chief Justice of the state supreme court. The plaintiffs will argue that the laws violate due process and property rights under the state constitution. The organizations bringing the suit are the North Carolina Environmental Justice Network, the Rural Empowerment Association for Community Help (REACH), Waterkeeper Alliance, and Winyah Rivers Alliance.
“This is my family’s homeplace,” said Devon Hall, co-founder and program director of REACH, in a press release about the constitutional challenge. “Although I am not a plaintiff in the ongoing nuisance case, I believe that the North Carolina General Assembly overstepped its constitutional grounds to block me or anyone else from seeking justice in court from anyone that has caused unreasonable harm to a neighbor. How is it that the state can take away my community’s ability to protect our homes and health? How can that be right?”
North Carolina has been the site of ongoing litigation between community members affected by the water and air pollution associated with massive hog confinement operations, and the hog industry. North Carolina has the highest concentration of hog farms in the country, and is second only to Iowa in hog production. Many of the hog confinements in the state are in a floodplain and were dramatically impacted by hurricanes Matthew and Florence.
The state legislature has passed two recent amendments to its existing right-to-farm statute—House Bill 467 in 2017 and Senate Bill 711 in 2018. HB 467 restricted plaintiffs in nuisance lawsuits to suing just for the loss of property value as a result of farm-related nuisances, eliminating the ability to sue for quality of life impacts. SB 711 required that plaintiffs seeking to sue a farm operation prove that the operation is not adhering to industry best practices, which critics say doesn’t address the negative impacts of best practices that include dumping untreated hog manure into often unlined lagoons. Both bills were passed by the legislature over the governor’s veto.
“This suit challenges recent limits to legal rights that predated North Carolina’s statehood,” said Will Hendrick, staff attorney at Waterkeeper Alliance, in a press release. “The General Assembly passed those limits after neighbors of industrial hog operations in North Carolina won federal lawsuits based on those longstanding rights. Laws should be made to protect North Carolinians from proven harm, not strip them of their rights.”
Over the past year, juries in five cases have awarded more than $574 million to North Carolina plaintiffs who are suing Smithfield subsidiary Murphy Brown, alleging the company’s mismanagement of hog manure has caused negative health effects and financial losses for those who live near its farms. The successful suits have prompted industry organizations to push for expansions of right-to-farm laws, making it harder for similar lawsuits to be brought in other states.