The Fourth Circuit rejected the state’s numerous claims that undercover investigations fall outside of First Amendment protections, holding that each of the challenged provisions are not just subject to the First Amendment, but are viewpoint discriminatory, as they were originally passed to suppress speech critical of businesses and employer conduct.
Raleigh, NC – Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit handed an important win to plaintiffs in a lawsuit
challenging North Carolina’s Ag-Gag law, ruling that undercover
investigations and whistleblowing are considered newsgathering
activities protected by the First Amendment.
A coalition of public interest groups filed a lawsuit challenging
North Carolina’s “Anti-Sunshine” law – a statute that restricts
these groups from conducting and publicizing undercover
investigations by allowing employers and property owners to sue
undercover investigators seeking to expose unethical or illegal
activities in the workplace. Although similar to “Ag-Gag” laws
challenged around the country, the state’s law extends beyond animal
agriculture facilities and penalizes undercover investigations in
settings like daycare centers and nursing homes.
Under North Carolina’s law, organizations and journalists are
susceptible to lawsuits and substantial damages if they publicize
evidence gathered from investigative activities such as speaking
with employees, recording documents in nonpublic areas, documenting
animal abuse, and performing surveillance at unsafe and unethical
workplaces. Additionally, the law’s text and legislative history
shows that the statute’s primary objective is to stop undercover
investigations by what the legislature termed “private
special-interest organizations,” specifically those focused on
animal agriculture and food health and safety.
Today, the Fourth Circuit rejected the state’s numerous claims that
undercover investigations fall outside of First Amendment
protections, holding that each of the challenged provisions are not
just subject to the First Amendment, but are viewpoint
discriminatory, as they were originally passed to suppress speech
critical of businesses and employer conduct.
“Consumers have a right to know how food is produced — and the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals agrees,” said Animal Legal Defense
Fund Managing Attorney Amanda Howell. “The gusto in which industrial
animal agriculture continues to fight to keep witnesses out of
factory farms and slaughterhouses paints a disturbing image of
America’s food system — and creates increased urgency for
transparency.”
The plaintiffs group consists of People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals, Center for Food Safety, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, Farm
Sanctuary, Food & Water Watch, Government Accountability Project,
Farm Forward, and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty
to Animals.