Amicus Curiae Brief — Iowa Pork Producers Association, Petitioner v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California, et al.

No. 24-728

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

————

IOWA PORK PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION,

v.

Petitioner,

ROB BONTA, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Respondents.

————

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals

for the Ninth Circuit

————

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE

PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY EAGLES AND EAGLE

FORUM EDUCATION & LEGAL DEFENSE

FUND IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER

————

ANDREW L. SCHLAFLY

939 OLD CHESTER ROAD

FAR HILLS, NJ 07931

(908) 719-8608

aschlafly@aol.com

Counsel for Amici Curiae

February 6, 2025

WILSON-EPES PRINTING CO., INC. – (202) 789-0096 – WASHINGTON, D.C. 20002

i

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

Under the plurality opinion in Nat’l Pork

Producers Council v. Ross, 598 U.S. 356 (2023),

the California ballot initiative Proposition 12 is

allowed to impose immense and costly burdens on

pig farmers in Iowa, who produce one-third of our

Nation’s pork.

1. Whether Nat’l Pork Producers Council v.

Ross should be overruled for allowing one

state to regulate the production of goods in

another state by limiting what can be sold

in the largest domestic market.

2. Whether lawmaking by direct democracy,

namely ballot initiative Proposition 12 that

was funded with a 30-to-1 spending

advantage in California, violates the

constitutional guarantee of a republican

form of government for residents of another

state. U.S. CONST. Art IV, Sec. 4.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages

Questions Presented .............................................. i

Table of Contents ................................................. ii

Table of Authorities ............................................ iii

Interests of Amici Curiae ..................................... 1

Summary of Argument ......................................... 2

Argument .............................................................. 4

I. The Petition Should Be Granted to

Overrule Nat’l Pork Producers Council

and Avert Worsening Conflict Among

the States........................................................ 4

II. Proposition 12 Deprives Iowans of a

Republican Form of Government in

Violation of the Guarantee Clause. ............... 8

Conclusion ........................................................... 10

iii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Pages

Cases

Brimer v. Amash Imps., Inc.,

No. C11-5291 EMC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

206730 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2012) ..................... 6

Cal. Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. Ross,

2022 Cal. Super. LEXIS 8135 .......................... 5

Chiafalo v. Washington, 591 U.S. 578 (2020) ...... 4

Consumer Def. Grp. v. Rental Hous. Indus.

Members, 137 Cal. App. 4th 1185,

40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 832 (2006) .............................. 6

Nat’l Pork Producers Council v. Ross,

598 U.S. 356 (2023) ....................... i-ii, 3-5, 7, 10

Scott v. Sandford,

60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857) .......................... 3

Constitution and Statutes

U.S. CONST. Art. IV, Sec. 4 ........................ i, 1, 3, 8

Cal. Bus. & Prof, Code §§ 17202-17204 ............... 5

Cal. Bus. & Prof, Code § 17206 ............................ 5

Cal. Proposition 12, the Farm Animal

Confinement Initiative (2018)............ii, 2, 4-10

Cal. Proposition 65, Cal. Health & Safety

Code § 25249.6 ......................................... 5, 6, 9

Other Authorities

“2024 Presidential Election Live Results,”

270toWin, https://www.270towin.com/2024election-results-live/president/ ......................... 4

Robert Alt, “Ohio Pig Farmers Didn't Get a

Vote on California’s Proposition 12,”

Wall St. Journal A13 (October 7, 2022) ........ 3-4

Tom Barton, “What they’re thinking: Iowa

iv

pork industry copes with California’s

Prop 12, faces headwinds; U.S. pork

producers experienced their worst losses

in 25 years in 2023,” The Gazette (Cedar

Rapids, Iowa) (Jul. 15, 2024)

https://www.thegazette.com/agriculture/whattheyre-thinking-iowa-pork-industry-copeswith-californias-prop-12-faces-headwinds/ ...... 5

Brief of Amicus Curiae Eagle Forum Education

& Legal Defense Fund in Support of

Petitioners, Alexander v. Sandoval, 2000 U.S.

S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 610, No. 99-1908 .............. 2

California Pork Producers Association, “Pork”

https://cdn.agclassroom.org/ca/resources/fact/

pork.pdf ............................................................. 3

The Federalist No. 10 (James Madison) .............. 9

https://ballotpedia.org/California_

Proposition_12,_Farm_Animal_Confinement_

Initiative_(2018)#Campaign_finance............... 3

Anna Massoglia, “Record-breaking federal

lobbying tops $2.2 billion in first half of 2024”

(Aug. 29, 2024)

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/08/

record-breaking-federal-lobbying-tops-2billion-first-half-2024/ ...................................... 8

Collin Riviello, “Why are egg prices soaring?”

CBS - 7 WSPA (Greenville-Spartanburg,

South Carolina) (Jan. 30, 2025) .................... 6-7

Paul Rogers, “Proposition 12: Cage-free eggs,

more room for farm animals on ballot,” The

Mercury News (Oct. 30, 2018)

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/10/20/

proposition-12-cage-free-eggs-more-roomfor-farm-animals-on-ballot/ .............................. 6

No. 24-728

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

IOWA PORK PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION,

Petitioner,

v.

ROB BONTA, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.,

Respondents.

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

INTERESTS OF AMICI CURIAE1

Amicus Curiae Phyllis Schlafly Eagles was founded

in 2016 as an association to carry on the work of its

namesake in advocacy and educational work,

including defense of our republican form of

government as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

U.S. CONST. Art. IV, Sec. 4.

Amici file this brief after providing the requisite ten days’

advance written notice to counsel for all the parties. Pursuant to

Rule 37.6, counsel for amici curiae authored this brief in whole,

no counsel for a party authored this brief in whole or in part, and

no such counsel or a party made a monetary contribution

intended to fund the preparation or submission of this brief. No

person or entity – other than amici, its members, and its

counsel – contributed monetarily to the preparation or

submission of this brief.

1

2

Amicus Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense

Fund (“Eagle Forum ELDF”) was founded in 1981 by

Phyllis Schlafly, to advance conservative educational

and legal goals. Eagle Forum ELDF has filed multiple

amicus curiae briefs in this Court and in lower

appellate courts for more than two decades, including

in opposition to the balkanization of our country. See,

e.g., Brief of Amicus Curiae Eagle Forum Education &

Legal Defense Fund in Support of Petitioners,

Alexander v. Sandoval, 2000 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS

610, *6, No. 99-1908 (“[T]he Constitution disfavors

language balkanization for the reason that it

encourages secession. The former promotes the latter,

as the Quebec controversy demonstrates ….”).

Amici thereby have strong interests in this Petition

for a Writ of Certiorari with respect to California

heavily burdening Iowa farmers by enacting a ballot

initiative in California.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

California ballot initiative Proposition 12, the

Farm Animal Confinement Initiative (2018), is a

significant divergence from Iowa and many states,

which foments a worsening economic disunity that

could become impossible to repair. Proposition 12

imposes enormous costs to be borne primarily by Iowa

due to its heavy reliance on pig farming. Nearly onethird of all the pigs in the United States are raised in

Iowa, which has less than one-tenth the population of

California but 300 times as many pigs. “California

makes up less than one percent of the total U.S. pork

3

production,”2 such that its imposition of an immense

regulatory burden and lawfare against pig farmers is

tantamount to a significant tax on Iowans.

A descent into national disunity looms, as this issue

does not end with pork. Inevitably California

environmentalists and climate change opponents will

seek to regulate energy production, such as oil

refineries prevalent in Texas but scarce in California,

based on the precedent of Nat’l Pork Producers Council

v. Ross, 598 U.S. 356 (2023). Before long there could be

a repeat of the divisiveness of the 1850s, which was

inflamed by a states’ right decision then. Scott v.

Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857). Now, as then,

there may not be time for the Supreme Court to seek

to restore unity once States go in divergent directions.

California interest groups are free to spend their

war chests on electing and lobbying legislators in Iowa

and other states, which would not disrupt the

constitutional guarantee to Iowans of a republican

form of government. U.S. CONST. Art. IV, Sec. 4. But

for merely $13 million Californians enacted a ballot

initiative there instead, outspending their opponents

by 30-to-1.3 Iowans should not have to try to defeat a

ballot initiative 2,000 miles away in a process of direct

democracy process that Iowans reject, in order to

preserve the way of life in Iowa. See, e.g., Robert Alt,

“Ohio Pig Farmers Didn't Get a Vote on California's

California

Pork

Producers

Association,

https://cdn.agclassroom.org/ca/resources/fact/pork.pdf

Feb. 5, 2025)

2

“Pork”

(viewed

3

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_12,_Farm_Animal

_Confinement_Initiative_(2018)#Campaign_finance (viewed Feb.

6, 2025).

4

Proposition 12,” Wall St. Journal A13 (October 7,

2022). It violates the Guarantee Clause to allow

Californians to regulate Iowans through this process.

ARGUMENT

I. The Petition Should Be Granted to

Overrule Nat’l Pork Producers Council and

Avert Worsening Conflict Among the States.

Once started, trade or cultural wars can be nearly

impossible to stop, and the worsening conflicts among

the States could be disastrous for national unity.

Presidential elections are already highly divisive, with

70-point swings in the winning margins of the two

leading candidates depending on the state,4 despite

relatively narrow outcomes overall. Foreign wars do

not bind our Nation together internally as they once

did, and the sprawling population of the United States

today is more than ten times that of 1860. Like the

potentially disastrous faithless elector problem, it

would be best for this Court to nip the disunity in the

bud before it becomes a national crisis. See, e.g.,

Chiafalo v. Washington, 591 U.S. 578, 586 n.3 (2020)

(resolving the issue of faithless electors despite how

“[s]ince the events in this case, Washington has

repealed the fine”).

This Court found insufficient that Proposition 12

compliance will “increase production costs per pig by

over $13 dollars per head, a 9.2% cost increase at the

farm level.” Nat’l Pork Producers Council v. Ross, 598

U.S. 356, 399 (2023) (Roberts, C.J., dissenting and

concurring in part). But in a low-margin business,

4 In 2024, President Trump won West Virginia by 42 percentage

points, but lost Vermont by 32. https://www.270towin.com/2024election-results-live/president/ (viewed Feb. 3, 2025).

5

such a cost increase is the difference between

remaining open or closing. In 2023, the year before

Proposition 12 took effect, U.S. pork producers

suffered their worst losses in a quarter century, losing

$32 per hog.5

As observed by a California state court, a violation

of Proposition 12 constitutes unfair competition as

defined in Section 17200 of the California Business

and Professions Code, which vastly adds to costs being

imposed on Iowa pig farmers:

By incorporating the Unfair Competition Law

(UCL) in Section 17200 et sequitur of the Business

and Professions Code, the Act authorizes private

parties claiming to have lost money or property due

to a prohibited sale of whole pork meat to sue for

equitable relief. (See Bus. & Prof, Code §§ 1720217204.) The UCL also empowers Bonta, district

attorneys and other public prosecutors to sue and

seek civil penalties. (See id., §§ 17204,17206.)

Cal. Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. Ross, 2022

Cal. Super. LEXIS 8135, *5-6.

In this respect Proposition 12 is analogous to the

notorious California Proposition 65, which compels

companies to provide silly cancer warnings nationwide

lest they be subjected to costly litigation that is

“absurdly easy” to file in California state court.

5 Tom Barton, “What they’re thinking: Iowa pork industry copes

with California’s Prop 12, faces headwinds; U.S. pork producers

experienced their worst losses in 25 years in 2023,” The Gazette

(Cedar Rapids, Iowa) (Jul. 15, 2024).

https://www.thegazette.com/agriculture/what-theyre-thinkingiowa-pork-industry-copes-with-californias-prop-12-facesheadwinds/ (viewed Feb. 6, 2025).

6

Consumer Def. Grp. v. Rental Hous. Indus. Members,

137 Cal. App. 4th 1185, 1217, 40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 832, 855

(2006) (“bringing Proposition 65 litigation is so

absurdly easy”). Removal to federal court by nonCalifornia defendants of these harassing lawsuits is

thwarted by clever drafting of these initiatives to keep

the lawfare in state court. Brimer v. Amash Imps., Inc.,

No. C11-5291 EMC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206730, at

*12 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2012) (no Article III “standing

in connection with similar private attorney general

suits,” and thus an out-of-state defendant cannot

remove to federal court). California’s pro-plaintifflitigation ballot initiative forces residents of the 49

other states to be repeatedly peppered with unwanted

disclaimers their own states never approved or

required.

The president of the California Farm Bureau

Federation, Jamie Johansson, declared that “[a]ll

Proposition 12 does is allow trial lawyers to file

predatory lawsuits against egg farmers, who provide

some of the healthiest food on the planet.”6 California

imports 60% of its eggs, and the astronomical increase

in the price of eggs nationwide has been attributed in

part to Proposition 12. While the bird flu has

contributed to the sharp rise in egg prices, the Director

of Clemson University's Agribusiness Program Team

Jonathan “Kantrovich points to another factor

for surging egg prices: cage-free laws,” by which he

refers to Proposition 12. Collin Riviello, “Why

Paul Rogers, “Proposition 12: Cage-free eggs, more room for

farm animals on ballot,” The Mercury News (Oct. 30, 2018).

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/10/20/proposition-12-cagefree-eggs-more-room-for-farm-animals-on-ballot/ (viewed Jan. 24,

2025).

6

7

are egg prices soaring?” CBS - 7 WSPA (GreenvilleSpartanburg, South Carolina) (Jan. 30, 2025).

California ballot initiatives should not be allowed to

control what residents see and pay in South Carolina,

2,500 miles away.

There is no end to the creative but harmful mischief

that California activists can do under this Court’s

precedent in Nat’l Pork Producers Council. What

Proposition 12 has done to pig farmers in Iowa could

next be done through the California ballot initiative

process to energy producers in Texas, which has the

largest number of oil refineries in the country.

While Iowa pig farmers lack the financial and

political clout to compete with the California

billionaires in Silicon Valley and Hollywood, Texas

will surely punch back against California and once

that fight starts it may become impossible for this

Court to stop. Nat’l Pork Producers Council invites a

trade war between California and other states by

allowing one-sided economic impact of partisan

regulation by one State against an industry located

primarily in another State. Of course this Court would

take notice of that fight, but this dispute between Iowa

farmers and California should be equally important.

This Court mentioned that Congress, which is

perennially stuck in gridlock, could intervene to adopt

a national standard for pork production. Iowa pig

farmers “have failed—repeatedly—to persuade

Congress to use its express Commerce Clause

authority to adopt a uniform rule for pork production.”

Nat'l Pork Producers Council, 598 U.S. at 390. But the

close alliance between California and the Democrat

Party renders impossible the prospect of enacting any

bipartisan legislation that could overcome the 60-vote

8

cloture rule in the U.S. Senate. Iowa farmers should

have rights regardless of inaction by Congress.

II. Proposition 12 Deprives Iowans of a

Republican Form of Government in Violation

of the Guarantee Clause.

For a pittance of the immense lobbying costs

needed to enact federal legislation by hiring K-street

firms,7 California special interests have regulated

Iowa farmers by spending merely $13 million to enact

a ballot initiative 2,000 miles away from Iowa. This is

a clever political approach, but one that this Court

should firmly reject as violating the Guarantee Clause.

The Guarantee Clause ensures representative

government for every state. U.S. CONST. Art. IV, Sec.

4. Yet Proposition 12, enacted by a California citizen

initiative process properly banned in Iowa, deprives

Iowa pig farmers of their guarantee of a republican

form of government for their way of life. Special

interest groups in California thereby bypassed the

legislative process of holding hearings and receiving

testimony by affected Iowans. Proposition 12 further

deprives the Iowa pig farmers of due process by

subjecting them to plaintiffs’ litigation in California

state court, without an ability to remove the case to

An underestimate of the lobbying cost to enact new federal

legislation would be $100 million – with no guarantee of success

– in light of how $2.2 billion overall was spent on federal lobbying

in merely the first half of 2024, and how it often takes multiple

legislation sessions to enact new legislation. Anna Massoglia,

“Record-breaking federal lobbying tops $2.2 billion in first half of

2024” (Aug. 29, 2024)

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2024/08/record-breakingfederal-lobbying-tops-2-billion-first-half-2024/ (viewed Feb. 5,

2025).

7

9

federal court, similar to what Proposition 65 has done

to businesses nationwide. See supra Point I.

The well-heeled interest groups in California that

want to regulate Iowa farmers have full access to a

republican political process, consistent with the U.S.

Constitution, to seek their goals: participate in

electing and lobbying representatives in Iowa or in

Congress, who can then hold hearings and consider

legislation favored by certain Californians. That

process of representative government is what the

Guarantee Clause requires. Instead, Proposition 12

takes an unconstitutional approach of exploiting direct

democracy in California to regulate Iowans.

This ballot initiative process for law-making by

Californians against Iowans runs afoul of the central

principle of the Constitution as articulated by James

Madison in Federalist No. 10: “The influence of

factious leaders may kindle a flame within their

particular States, but will be unable to spread a

general conflagration through the other States.” The

Federalist No. 10 (James Madison). Ballot initiatives

that bypass representative government “spread a

general conflagration” as Proposition 12 has.

It is, indeed, unnecessary to invoke the dormant

Commerce Clause to reject the misguided approach of

Proposition 12 to use direct democracy in California to

regulate Iowans. The Guarantee Clause prohibits

lawmaking that circumvents the legislative process of

representative government.

Otherwise, there will inevitably be additional

future targets of California’s “factious leaders” to take

aim at more out-of-state industries, such as gun

manufacturing, fracking, traditional cars, and even

10

fur farming, all of which are industries mostly foreign

to California. As the largest state and thus the biggest

consumer of most goods, California should not be

allowed to dictate by ballot initiative to the rest of the

country how goods should be produced. California

interest groups should instead abide by the Guarantee

Clause and take their cause to Congress or legislatures

in states where these targeted industries are primarily

located. Then legislative hearings could be held and

decision-making would be informed.

The admonishment by the plurality in Nat’l Pork

Producers Council of pig farmers for having failed to

enact federal legislation could be better directed at

supporters of Proposition 12 who have failed to

persuade either Congress or the Iowa legislature to

embrace utopian requirements for raising pigs. The

Guarantee Clause requires abiding by the republican

process of representative government, rather than

lawmaking by popular vote in California to regulate

Iowans.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons and those stated in the

Petition, the Court should grant the Writ of Certiorari.

Respectfully submitted,

ANDREW L. SCHLAFLY

939 OLD CHESTER ROAD

FAR HILLS, NJ 07931

(908) 719-8608

aschlafly@aol.com

Counsel for Amici Curiae

Dated: February 6, 2025