US Supreme Court turns away appeal in PETA undercover recording case

Published 10/16/2023, 09:47 AM
Updated 10/16/2023, 02:06 PM
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The United States Supreme Court building is seen as in Washington, U.S., October 4, 2023. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo

By Andrew Chung

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear North Carolina's defense of a state law aimed at preventing hidden-camera investigations from damaging farms and other businesses in a challenge by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and other animal rights groups.

The justices turned away appeals by North Carolina's Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein and a trade association representing North Carolina farmers of a lower court's ruling that the 2015 law violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment right to free speech when enforced against "newsgathering activities." The lower court sidestepped deciding the law's validity in certain non-newsgathering contexts.

PETA has said it conducts undercover investigations to expose the abuse of animals in laboratories, farms and slaughterhouses, the pet trade, clothing industry and other areas. It has said it had wanted to conduct an undercover investigation of animal testing labs at the University of North Carolina but feared the threat of monetary damages from the state law, which critics call one of several "ag-gag" measures around the country aimed at restraining animal rights activists.

PETA said it was celebrating Monday's decision to turn away the appeals.

"Ag-Gag laws are a desperate, last-ditch attempt by animal exploiters to smother free speech and hide appalling cruelty to animals from a public that is increasingly disinclined to tolerate it," PETA Foundation General Counsel for Animal Law Jared Goodman said.

Stein's office said it was reviewing the decision.

PETA, the Animal Legal Defense Fund and several other organizations sued in 2016 to block the law's enforcement, saying it targets the free speech of whistleblowers.

The law allows a business or property owner to sue "double-agent" workers who make secret recordings or remove documents from non-public areas and use the information to "breach the person's duty of loyalty to the employer," to recover monetary damages for the violations.

The state, represented by Stein, said the law would protect all employers against a wide range of harms, such as unauthorized use by employees of trade secrets, campaign strategies or patient information.

The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in February that the law violates the First Amendment when enforced against "newsgathering activities," such as those pursued by PETA and the other plaintiffs.

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The United States Supreme Court building is seen as in Washington, U.S., October 4, 2023. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo

Stein had told the justices that "newsgatherers have no First Amendment right to break generally applicable laws," such as against trespassing.

Various activist organizations on the left and right carry out undercover investigations intended to expose wrongdoing, sometimes being accused of selectively editing video to make their subjects took bad.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2025 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.