A Utah federal judge is deciding whether a state ban on hidden cameras in slaughterhouses defies the First Amendment right to freedom of speech. The case could set a national precedent.
“Animal activists argue the law is an unconstitutional attempt to keep them from exposing inhumane or unsafe practices at factory farms,” says Magic Valley.com. “The state of Utah contends the First Amendment doesn’t allow people to enter private property under false pretenses and record however they want.” Supporting the state are major industry groups, including the Animal Agriculture Alliance and the U.S. Poultry and Egg Association.
“I don’t think there’s a constitutional right to spy,” said Kyle Kaiser with the Utah Attorney General’s Office, adding that the law made farms safer by keeping out untrained undercover advocates.
Animal rights groups, on the other hand, have said that they don’t have a problem with private property owners removing someone with a camera. The problem is when the government steps in.
“What we’re trying to protect against is a government motive to silence speech,” said Lawyer Matthew Liebman with the Animal Legal Defense Fund.
Liebman believes that the Utah law is part of a much larger national effort to bar animal-rights groups from releasing damning footage of farm operations. Seven states have ag-gag type laws on the books, and 20 more attempts at similar legislation in different states have been defeated, according to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA).