In a rare case of common sense prevailing, a U.S. Court has ruled in favor of Natural Grocers and plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Tom Vilsack and the USDA, deeming QR codes as UNLAWFUL and insufficient to label GMOs in foods.
Holy Mackeral and HALLELUYAH!
First seen on Sustainable Pulse, the article reads:
A U.S. District Court has held that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s decision to allow genetically engineered (GMO) foods to only be labeled with a “QR” code was unlawful and that USDA must instead add additional disclosure options to those foods under USDA’s National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard. The Court sent back to the agency the QR code portions of the 2018 Trump administration rules for GMO labeling that went into effect on January 1, 2022, which hindered consumer access with burdensome electronic or digital disclosures.
“This is a victory for all Americans,” said Meredith Stevenson, Center for Food Safety (CFS) staff attorney and counsel in the case. “Today’s decision marks a key step toward ending the food industry’s deceptive and discriminatory GMO food labeling practices, which have kept consumers in the dark by concealing what’s in their products.”
CFS filed the case against USDA in 2020 on behalf of a coalition of nonprofits and retailers, including Natural Grocers, operating 157 stores in 20 states, and Puget Consumers Co-op, the nation’s largest community-owned food market. The lawsuit followed the USDA’s rulemaking in December 2018, which would have discriminated against tens of millions of Americans by permitting the use of QR codes alone on the packaging after the USDA itself found QR code labeling insufficient.
The lawsuit followed an over twenty-year campaign led by CFS to get GMO labeling in the U.S., as it is in over 60 countries around the world, including state legislation and culminating in the first-ever federal GMO labeling law.
The lawsuit, as posted by the Center for Food Safety, reads:
The retail store plaintiffs, namely Natural Grocers, Good Earth Natural Foods, and Puget Consumers Co-op, filed multiple declarations attesting to their stake in disclosing information about bioengineered foods to interested consumers and how the regulations are said to adversely affect the stores. See Dkt. Nos. 54-1, 54-7, 54-9. Several members of the advocacy group plaintiffs, Center for Food Safety, Rural Vermont, Citizens for GMO Labeling, Label GMOs, and National Organic Coalition, filed declarations describing their organizational interests in transparent labeling of bioengineered foods, their individual interests in obtaining information about bioengineered foods, and how the regulations are said to impede those interests by restricting the scope of disclosures.
“The court has now confirmed that the USDA acted unlawfully in allowing standalone QR code and another digital and electronic GMO labeling,” said Andrew Kimbrell, Executive Director of the Center for Food Safety. “This should be a warning to the industrial food sector that avoiding clear packaging labeling by using QR codes alone will not pass legal scrutiny. CFS will continue to work to ensure every American’s right to know what is in their food.”
The court ruled that USDA’s decision to allow for electronic or digital disclosure alone on the packaging, also known as “QR code” or “smartphone” labeling, without requiring additional on-package labeling, was a “significant error.” USDA violated the law in allowing QR codes alone despite Congress’s “straightforward” mandate requiring the agency first to study whether digital disclosure would provide meaningful information to consumers to improve accessibility and to remedy it if it found them insufficient. In 2018, CFS successfully sued USDA to release the study, showing that QR codes would fail conclusively. But in this final rule, USDA went ahead with it anyway.
The court decision explained that “in mandating a study on the accessibility of the electronic disclosure, and directing the USDA to act only if the electronic disclosure was determined to be inaccessible, Congress clearly intended for the USDA to provide “additional and comparable options” to improve the accessibility of the electronic disclosure method.”
USDA will now need to revise the portions of its 2018 rules that allow for QR code labeling and remove the option of QR codes alone on the package. Instead, USDA will be required to add a disclosure option to QR code labeling accessible to all Americans.
The court sided with USDA on several other challenges brought by the Plaintiffs, including upholding USDA’s use of the new, unfamiliar terminology, “bioengineered,” and disallowing “GE” or “GMO.” The court also ruled that USDA may continue excluding “highly refined” products from mandatory disclosure unless the GE material is “detectable” by a manufacturer’s chosen testing method. For these rulings, “the Plaintiffs will be considering all options, including appeal,” according to Stevenson.
Quotes from the represented Plaintiffs:
“This is a win for the American family. They can now make fully informed shopping decisions instead of being forced to use detective work to understand what food labels are hiding,” said Alan Lewis, Vice President of Advocacy & Governmental Affairs for Natural Grocers. “The Court considers the public’s rejection of hidden GMOs to be greater than the agrochemical industry’s desire to hide GMOs behind incomprehensible bureaucratic rules.”
“We are very gratified that the District Court has acknowledged the flawed nature of the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard and has removed at least one of the very egregious aspects of it from the labeling standard,” said Mark Squire, co-owner and manager of Good Earth Natural Foods. “We will continue to fight for complete honesty and transparency in food labeling.”
“PCC believes our communities have a right to know what is in their food and how their food is grown in a way that is clear, easy to access for all, and doesn’t violate the first amendment rights of retailers,” said Aimee Simpson, Director of Advocacy & Product Sustainability for PCC Community Markets, a plaintiff. “Today’s ruling ensures that the national GMO labeling standards take us several steps closer to true food system transparency.”
“I am delighted that the court came back with the ruling that QR codes are insufficient and that companies must clearly state the presence of GMOs in foods. This is truly a win, and we thank the Center For Food Safety (CFS) for supporting the other plaintiffs and us in this lawsuit.
Moms Across America is thrilled with the results and the efforts by the law firms and plaintiffs who sued. We extend our deepest gratitude to all involved, especially the Judge who made this decision and every single activist who marched in parades, posted, emailed, spoke, shared, and emailed to label GMOs. THANK YOU!