Delicacy Foie Gras Back on Menu in California After Court Strikes Law

The Jan. 7, 2015 ruling represented a victory for restaurants that sold foie grass and a setback for animals-rights groups that claim the delicacy made from fattened duck liver is the result of an inhumane practice: force-feeding ducks.

Josh Long, Associate editorial director, Natural Products Insider

January 12, 2015

3 Min Read
Delicacy Foie Gras Back on Menu in California After Court Strikes Law

A controversial delicacy is back on the menu in California, at least for the moment: foie gras.

Last week, a federal judge overturned Cal. Health & Safety Code § 25982. The state law banned the sale in California of products that come from “force feeding a bird for the purpose of enlarging the bird’s liver beyond normal size."

The Jan. 7, 2015 ruling represented a victory for restaurants that sold foie grass and a setback for animals-rights groups that claim the delicacy made from fattened duck liver is the result of an inhumane practice: force feeding ducks.

“CALI FOIE BAN OVERTURNED. GOOD THING I ALWAYS HAVE IT ANYWAY!!!," tweeted David Bazirgan, a San Francisco chef.

Farm Sanctuary, an animal protection organization, urged California Attorney General Kamala Harris to file an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

“Foie gras is French for ‘fatty liver,’ and ‘fathead’ is the American word for the shameless chefs who actually need a law to make them stop serving the swollen, near-bursting organ of a cruelly force-fed bird," said Ingrid Newkirk, president of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, in a statement.

A California restaurant and other plaintiffs who challenged the law claimed they had lost millions in foie gras product sales and that district attorneys in three counties had threatened prosecution. U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson sided with them, finding that the federal Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) preempted the California law.

A related California law was not at issue in the case: Cal. Health & Safety Code § 25981, which bans force feeding a bird so its liver can be enlarged.

Wilson’s decision rested on 21 U.S.C. §467e, which prohibits states from imposing different marking, labeling, packaging or ingredient requirements than under the PPIA in relation to food that is prepared at an “official establishment".

“It is undisputed that the PPIA and its implementing regulations do not impose any requirement that foie gras be made with liver from non-force-fed birds. Thus, Plaintiffs’ foie gras products may comply with all federal requirements but still violate § 25982 because their products contain a particular constituent—force-fed bird’s liver," Wilson wrote, laying out his finding that the state law was preempted by the PPIA. “Accordingly, § 25982 imposes an ingredient requirement in addition to or different than the federal laws and regulations."

Farm Sanctuary contended the decision was erroneous. “Force feeding is clearly not an ingredient. It is a cruel farming practice, which is still banned in California and in more than a dozen other countries," said the organization, which is caring for some birds that were taken from a foie gras operation.

Following Wilson’s ruling, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) expressed confidence that the 9th Circuit would uphold the state law. It also said the decision doesn’t affect a California law (AB 1437) that requires shell eggs sold in the Golden State come from cage-free hens. The PPIA is inapplicable to hens that lay eggs, according to HSUS President Wayne Pacelle.

“A federal court has already dismissed a case brought by six state attorneys general challenging 1437, and directed that it cannot be refiled," Pacelle said in a statement.  

About the Author(s)

Josh Long

Associate editorial director, Natural Products Insider, Informa Markets Health and Nutrition

Josh Long directs the online news, feature and op-ed coverage at Natural Products Insider, which targets the health and wellness industry. He has been reporting on developments in the dietary supplement industry for over a decade, with a focus on regulatory issues, including at the Food and Drug Administration.

He has moderated and/or presented at industry trade shows, including SupplySide East, SupplySide West, Natural Products Expo West, NBJ Summit and the annual Dietary Supplement Regulatory Summit.

Connect with Josh on LinkedIn and ping him with story ideas at [email protected]

Education and previous experience

Josh majored in journalism and graduated from Arizona State University the same year "Jake the Snake" Plummer led the Sun Devils to the Rose Bowl against the Ohio State Buckeyes. He also holds a J.D. from the University of Wyoming College of Law, was admitted in 2008 to practice law in the state of Colorado and spent a year clerking for a state district court judge.

Over more than a quarter century, he’s written on various topics for newspapers and business-to-business publications – from the Yavapai in Arizona and a controversial plan for a nuclear-waste incinerator in Idaho to nuanced issues, including FDA enforcement of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA).

Since the late 1990s, his articles have been published in a variety of media, including but not limited to, the Cape Cod Times (in Massachusetts), Sedona Red Rock News (in Arizona), Denver Post (in Colorado), Casper Star-Tribune (in Wyoming), now-defunct Jackson Hole Guide (in Wyoming), Colorado Lawyer (published by the Colorado Bar Association) and Nutrition Business Journal.

Subscribe and receive the latest insights on the health and nutrition industry.
Join 37,000+ members. Yes, it's completely free.

You May Also Like