Later this week Keep Food Legal executive director Baylen Linnekin will travel from Washington, DC to New Orleans, home of great food and drink, to take part in two panels as part of the Southern Food and Beverage Museum's annual symposium. This is the second year in a row that Linnekin has made the trip to New Orleans to take part in this great SoFAB event.
On Friday, Linnekin will serve as moderator for an exciting panel on the regulatory climate for food trucks as part of SoFAB's continuing legal education (CLE) seminar Food, Drink, and the Law. The panel, Improving the Regulatory Climate for Food Trucks, features three fantastic speakers: Doug Povich, J.D., member of the board of directors of the DC Food Truck Association and co-owner of DC's Red Hook Lobster Pound food truck; Andrew Legrand, J.D., managing member of Andrew Legrand Law and co-founder of the New Orleans Food Truck Coalition; and Bert Gall, Senior Attorney with the Institute for Justice.
More on the CLE panel:
As food trucks have exploded in popularity, cities around the country have adopted different regulatory strategies pertaining to these mobile vendors. Some cities have imposed dramatic and unfair restrictions on food trucks, while other cities have embraced the trend and witnessed the attendant rewards—from increased food choices and quality to national and even worldwide acclaim. This panel of nationally recognized legal experts will explore the regulatory climate pertaining to food trucks in New Orleans and beyond and propose solutions that can help the Big Easy and other cities capitalize on the trend.
Tickets to the CLE (a daylong event featuring many other legal experts that fulfills a mandatory professional development requirement for many attorneys) are $165 and are available here.
Then, on Saturday, Linnekin will moderate a panel on food and social media as part of SoFAB's annual daylong Hungry in the South symposium. The panel, How Social Media Is Changing The Way We Eat, "will explore various ways that this change is happening across a variety of food and beverage industry sectors." The panel will allow Linnekin the opportunity to discuss the American University undergraduate class--Foodways 2.0--that he designed and is teaching this semester. This panel, like the earlier CLE panel, features a great set of panelists including Red Hook Lobster Pound's Povich; Christophe Jammet of Sparkify; and Mike Lee of StudioFeast and Bond Strategy & Influence.
You've reeled in disgust as governments target food trucks. You were aghast when the Food Safety Modernization Act put small farmers in its crosshairs. And you were outraged when we told you about USDA regulators shuttering an award-winning artisanal salumi maker. Just how far will the government go to intrude on your food freedom?
A new report released this week from Keep Food Legal executive director Baylen Linnekin, Michael Bachmann, and the Institute for Justice shows how food producers across the U.S. are increasingly dealing with government officials who want to tell them what they grow, raise, sell and eat. The IJ report, The Attack on Food Freedom, outlines case after case of local, state and federal officials cracking down on farmers, chefs, grocers and other food artisans.
As Keep Food Legal and the report define it, “food freedom” is your right to grow, raise, produce, buy, sell, share, cook, eat and drink the foods you want. But government officials frequently pass laws that undermine the right of food entrepreneurs to earn an honest living. The report reveals that overzealous food safety regulations, pointless obstacles put in place by bureaucrats, and a “new” interpretation of public health that permits regulations for nearly any reason together threaten the livelihood of small food entrepreneurs.
The report also reveals that America's early history contained few if any restrictions on food freedom--after British rule that was increasingly rife with such restrictions. And when the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments ended the horror of slavery and guaranteed the rights of African Americans, food freedom expanded in scope as a result.
“This report demonstrates that food freedom is a vitally important part of America's history and that we’ve moved away from respecting that right,” said Linnekin. “I hope this report will spur legislators, regulators and courts at all levels of government and people from all political, ideological and dietary perspectives to recognize the importance of food freedom.”
Wisconsin Law Review Publishes Food Law & Policy Article Co-Authored by Keep Food Legal's Baylen Linnekin
The Wisconsin Law Review has just published Food Law & Policy: The Fertile Field's Origins & First Decade--an article co-authored by Keep Food Legal executive director Baylen Linnekin and his colleague Emily Broad Leib, who founded and leads Harvard Law School's groundbreaking Food Law & Policy Clinic.
The article is the first to describe the history and development of the ten-year-old legal-academic field of Food Law & Policy. That field, as the authors define it, "is the study of the basis and impact of those laws and regulations that govern the entire 'food system'"--including not just federal laws and regulations but those at the state and local levels.
In what is likely a first for legal scholarship, the article also features a 7-minute video companion, which is directed by American University Prof. Leena Jayaswal and co-produced by Linnekin, Broad Leib, and Jayaswal. It features Linnekin, Broad Leib, and several of the key players in the development of Food Law & Policy--including Harvard Law Prof. Peter Barton Hutt; Drake Law Prof. Neil Hamilton, Arkansas Law Prof. Susan Schneider, and UCLA Law Prof. Michael Roberts.
"Food Law & Policy courses and scholarship focus on issues--including many of those that Keep Food Legal focuses on--like cottage food laws, farm subsidies, food trucks, and bans targeting foods like raw milk, foie gras, and soda," says Linnekin. "These courses often zero in on questions about why we have the food laws and regulations we do, and how those rules impact people."
As Linnekin and Broad Leib detail in the article, Food Law & Policy has been a growing and welcome addition at law schools around the country. A recent Harvard Law School publication noted, for example, that there is "no hotter topic in law schools right now than food law and policy."
As if to prove that point, Linnekin is also excited to announce that he will be teaching a 2-credit Food Law & Policy Seminar at George Mason University Law School this coming fall.
With this groundbreaking new article and video companion and the spread of law school courses focused on Food Law & Policy, the field will only continue to grow in scope and importance over the next decade.
In a new Fox News opinion column, Keep Food Legal executive director Baylen Linnekin argues that food freedom is facing a withering attack of the sort this country hasn't seen since the New Deal era.
Whether you're a champion of small farmers or Big Gulps, this year has something for everyone to dislike. The thing that makes this year stand out as so bad so early is the pervasion of terrible regulations at the federal, state, and local levels.
For example, writes Linnekin, in just the first few months of this year, the federal government has passed an awful Farm Bill, doubled down on a costly and pointless expansion of the USDA's flagging National School Lunch Program, and moved to ban trans fats. Other food ingredients--from salt to caffeine--are also under attack by the federal government.
States are also in on the act. A widely reviled California law that requires chefs and bartenders to wear gloves while preparing food takes effect this year. The state is also considering a bill that would add warning labels to soda and other sweetened drinks. And Idaho legislators passed a so-called "ag gag" law that criminalizes news- and information-gathering pertaining to farm animals (the First Amendment be damned).
Cities, too, are in on these attacks on food freedom. In San Francisco, officials there are considering an astronomical soda tax (just as even more research emerges that soda taxes don't reduce obesity) and have also placed restrictions on a drink people might choose instead of soda: bottled water.
All of this adds up, writes Linnekin, to the makings of an historically bad year for food freedom. While it's not yet on par with the New Deal era--when, Linnekin notes, the USDA barred farmers from making bread with their own wheat, and reports indicated that "the USDA was 'skeptical of amateur farmers'"--it's still early in 2014.
Earlier this year, in another Fox News opinion column that's one of the website's most-read and most-talked-about pieces so far this year, Linnekin warned that food freedom would be under attack in 2014.
A pair of bills introduced last week by Rep. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.) could loosen the FDA's stranglehold on the interstate shipment and sale of raw milk. Rep. Massie, a farmer who raises and markets grass-fed beef, was joined in sponsoring the bills by Rep. Chellie Pingree (D–Maine) and a total of eighteen other House members from both sides of the aisle.
Keep Food Legal executive director Baylen Linnekin told Politico that the bills are evidence of a welcome shift by advocates for raw milk and other food choices toward the more rights-based arguments favored by Keep Food Legal (e.g., you have a right to eat what you want) and away from more qualified, scientific- and nutrition-based arguments (e.g., you have a right to eat what you want because it's healthy).
"'It’s nice to see that people are now advocating for their right rather than science,' said Baylen Linnekin, executive director of Keep Food Legal, a group that describes itself as 'the first nationwide membership organization devoted to food freedom—the right of every American to grow, raise, produce, buy, sell, share, cook, eat, and drink the foods of their own choosing.'"
According to a press release issued by Rep. Massie's office, the bills—-the “Milk Freedom of Act” and the “Interstate Milk Freedom Act”—-are intended "to improve consumer food choices and to protect local farmers from federal interference."
The bills would prohibit the federal government from interfering with the interstate traffic of raw milk or its sale between farmers and consumers in "states where distribution or sale of such products is already legal."
Keep Food Legal's Baylen Linnekin to Moderate Panel at Harvard Law School Meat Conference Next Month
Keep Food Legal executive director Baylen Linnekin will moderate a panel next month at an exciting one-day Harvard Law School symposium.
The Meat We Eat, a forum co-sponsored by the Harvard Food Law Society and Harvard Law School’s Student Animal Legal Defense Fund, seeks to "explore the legal and policy aspects of industrial animal farming and related effects on public health, the environment, and animal welfare."
The panel Linnekin will moderate, "Reducing Legal Barriers, Empowering Consumers, and Creating Pathways for Sustainably and Humanely Raised Meat," focuses on ways to lower the regulatory burden on small farmers and ranchers who raise animals for slaughter.
In a recent Reason column, Linnekin looked at how USDA regulations and mis-management of the process for slaughtering the animals we eat harms farmers, ranchers, and consumers alike and helps stifle consumer demand for niche (or artisanal) meat.
"USDA regulations effectively force consumers who want to support small-scale, local farmers to buy meat that's been processed in the same large slaughterhouses that larger competitors use," he writes. "Consequently, consumers who don't want to support large-scale agriculture have few, if any, ways to opt out of that USDA-supported system."
Last month may have been the most active--and worst--month for food freedom in recent American history. The month took off with Pres. Obama signing a subsidy-heavy Farm Bill into law, reached cruising altitude with rumblings of a nationwide lawsuit against food producers, and touched back down with a series of proposals--including a plan to expand the USDA's lousy school lunch program and a costly and misguided FDA proposal to change America's food labels.
Who's fighting back against this awfulness? Keep Food Legal, that's who. We've been a vocal (and quotable) opponent of this slew of regulatory challenges facing consumers and producers alike.
For example, Keep Food Legal executive director Baylen Linnekin has been quoted over the past week in two Politico stories on the proposed new regulations.
Asked to comment for a Politico piece that rightly paints the food industry as "under siege," thanks to the slew of new regulations proposed by the Obama administration, Linnekin urged the president to rein in his food-agency heads.
"'I wish the administration would take a step back,' said Baylen Linnekin, executive director of Keep Food Legal, a food freedom advocacy group, and a professor at American University. 'I would imagine [the food industry] has the same whiplash as someone like me or you who has just been trying to keep up with these changes.'"
In another Politico story, Linnekin spoke out against proposed changes to the FDA's labeling scheme for packaged foods.
"Baylen Linnekin, executive director of Keep Food Legal and a professor at American University, said he thinks the new labeling overhaul is misguided and will likely provide little or no benefit.
"'This is a case of pointy-headed academics thinking that their labeling changes are going to have an impact in the real world,' said Linnekin. 'While additions to the labels might make FDA and advocates happy, it’s likely the case that consumer behavior won’t change.'"
Linnekin also used his regular monthly appearance on Dennis Miller's popular syndicated radio show last week to speak out against the USDA and FDA actions in particular. Linnekin told Miller the proposed FDA labels were "likely to have little to no impact on consumers, just like the existing labels."
And in his most recent weekly Reason column, Linnekin describes how--when viewed as a whole--these and other recently proposed food regulations appear to be part of a pervasive new campaign against food freedom.
"February 2014 may go down as the worst month for food freedom since the New Deal era," writes Linnekin.
We will continue to fight to turn the tide in favor of food freedom. But we've got powerful foes in powerful places. Won't you please help support our work by donating today?