The state ban of California on the sale of foie gras has come to an end on Wednesday following the decision of United States District Judge Stephen Wilson to strike it after two and a half years of effectivity.
The restriction to serve or sell the dish was provided in a 2004 statute, which subsequently took effect in July 2012. Following the proclamation, numerous restaurant owners and chefs rejoiced on the chance to serve the dish, which is mainly composed of the fatty part of a duck or goose liver, again.
Wilson, a federal judge in the Central District of California, permanently stuck down the ban on the delicacy that was earlier prohibited to be served, or sold at establishments, or restaurants in the state. The relevant portion of the 2004 law that focused on the dish, which is based on the traditional French cuisine, is highlighted as follows:
"The bill would prohibit a person from force feeding a bird for the purpose of enlarging the bird's liver beyond normal size, and would prohibit a person from hiring another person to do so. The bill would also prohibit a product from being sold in the state if it is the result of force feeding a bird for the purpose of enlarging the bird's liver beyond normal size. The bill would authorize an officer to issue a citation for a violation of those provisions in an amount up to $1,000 per violation per day."
According to Wilson, the authority granted to the federal government to set the guidelines and regulate the selling or serving of poultry products unequivocally supersedes California's ban on foie gras. In previous discussions, the federal judge rejected the claims that the state could not execute its rules outside its borders. The same ruling was subsequently upheld by an appeals court.
Following their first defeat, the lawsuit was amended and cited the Poultry Products Inspection Act, which prohibits states from imposing requirements pertaining to the packaging, labeling or inclusion of ingredients that are different from the federal standards.
Moreover, Wilson explained that "California cannot regulate foie gras products' ingredients by creatively phrasing its law in terms of the manner in which those ingredients were produced."
Meanwhile, several animal rights groups have already began their protests against the overturned ban.
"California lawmakers conducted a serious-minded debate about farm animal welfare in 2004, passing a bill to phase out the cruel force-feeding of ducks and the sale of foie gras if it comes from that inhumane process. The state clearly has the right to ban the sale of the products of animal cruelty, and we expect the 9th Circuit will uphold this law, as it did in the previous round of litigation," claimed The Humane Society of the United States in their official statement.
