9th Circuit Ruling on Idaho “Ag Gag” Statute

The United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued a ruling on the constitutionality of Idaho’s Interference with Agricultural Production (commonly referred to as an “ag gag”) statute.  The Court affirmed in part the lower court decision holding a portion of the statute unconstitutional but upheld two specific statutory provisions.  This case is important as it is the first time a federal appellate court has found a constitutional right to record images on private property like a farm.  Animal rights groups are hailing this is a major victory, despite the fact that other provisions in the law were upheld.Moreover, this opinion offers insight into the type of provisions that are allowable and those that are not when drafting farm protection laws.  In addition to focusing on whether provisions involving misrepresentation were limited to situations involving legally cognizable harm or material gain, the Court also seemed to really focus on the true intent behind creating each provision.  So, provisions like section (d) where the purpose appeared clearly to be prohibiting investigative journalism did not fare well, whereas provisions like section (b) where there was an articulated purpose in the record like protecting breeding records were upheld.  This may serve as an important lesson to legislators drafting future statutes in other states.