The lawsuit argues that the Louisiana law violates Tofurky’s First Amendment right to free speech by improperly censoring truthful commercial speech.
On October 7, 2020, Animal Legal Defense Fund and The Good Food
Institute filed a lawsuit on behalf of Tofurky challenging a
Louisiana law that would impose fines of up to $500 per day for
every advertisement or sale of plant-based meat products that
include terms like “burger” and “sausage,” even when paired with
terms like “veggie,” “plant-based,” or “vegan.” The challenged law
became effective on October 1, 2020.
The lawsuit argues that the Louisiana law violates Tofurky’s First
Amendment right to free speech by improperly censoring truthful
commercial speech. The lawsuit further argues there is no evidence
that current labels mislead consumers, pointing out that Tofurky’s
products all clearly indicate the products are plant-based,
meatless, vegetarian, or vegan.
The Food and Drug Administration requires that all plant-based
products use a clear statement of identity that explains their
nature and contents using common or usual terms. This includes terms
that the public is familiar with — like “burger” and “hot dog” —
because they inform consumers about how products can be served and
what they taste like. The animal agriculture industry, in a clear
attempt to make plant-based products less appetizing to consumers,
has suggested that they be forced to use terms like “veggie pucks”
instead of “veggie burger” and “vegan tubes” instead of “vegan hot
dogs.”
The bill’s sponsor, Representative Francis Thompson, has admitted
that he designed the law to protect certain Louisiana agricultural
producers from growing competition from plant-based meat, riced
vegetables, and meat grown directly from animal cells, called
“cultivated” or “cultured” meat.
Who is being sued, why, and under what law? Louisiana Department of
Agriculture and Forestry (LDAF), arguing that the Louisiana law
violates Tofurky’s First Amendment right to free speech by
improperly censoring truthful commercial speech. The lawsuit further
argues there is no evidence that current labels mislead consumers,
pointing out that Tofurky’s products all clearly indicate the
products are plant-based, meatless, vegetarian, or vegan.
What court is the lawsuit filed in? United States District Court for
the Middle District of Louisiana
Why this case is important: There is no legitimate, constitutional
reason for the LDAF to censor Tofurky. The agency’s attempts to
restrict terminology are unconstitutional and harm plant-based
alternatives to animal products.
The animal agriculture industry claims that terms like “burger” and
“sausage” on plant-based products confuses consumers, yet there is
no evidence to support such claims. Moreover, animal agriculture
causes immense animal suffering, pollutes the environment, and
threatens human health and welfare.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund has been at the forefront of demanding
fair oversight of plant-based foods, in the face of aggressive
lobbying by factory farming interests — which have attempted to
strongarm state and federal lawmakers, and regulatory agencies, into
prohibiting plant-based products from using commonly understood
terms in their marketing and packaging.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund is working to ensure these
unconstitutional laws are struck down and that plant- and cultured
meat products — animal meat produced from animals’ cells, without
having to raise and kill living, feeling beings — have equal footing
in the marketplace. The organization currently represents the
interests of both plant- and cultured meat producers in lawsuits in
California, Missouri, and Arkansas that challenge unconstitutional
product labeling restrictions.