this Supreme Court North Carolina on Monday rejected an appeal by North Carolina in a dispute with animal rights groups over a law aimed at preventing undercover employees on farms and other workplaces from accessing documents or recording videos.
judges stay on the spot Legal victory for PETA Challenging a state law enacted in 2015. PETA said it wanted to conduct an investigation undercover at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill testing laboratory but feared prosecution under the Property Protection Act.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled 2-1 in February that the law cannot be enforced against PETA and other similarly situated organizations when it conducts news gatherings.
“People have a right to know about illegal and unethical behavior. Exposing unsafe or inhumane practices and working conditions is critical to holding powerful bad actors accountable for the harm they cause,” said FarmSTAND, which represents PETA and other groups challenging the law. Attorney David Muraskin said. Lawyers for PETA also applauded Monday’s rejection.
The law is similar to so-called state agriculture gag laws aimed at silencing undercover activists who videotape livestock operations, but has been struck down by several courts across the country over free speech concerns. The Supreme Court has so far declined to intervene.
4th Circuit majority opinion narrows Trial Court Judge’s 2020 Decision who repealed four provisions of the law related to potential clandestine activities.
Attorney General Josh Stein and the president of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill are both defendants in the case, and state attorneys have asked the Supreme Court to hear the case. So did the North Carolina Farm Bureau Federation, which also defended the law in court.
Stein’s office told the judge that there are conflicting decisions among circuit courts “regarding whether audiovisual recordings always constitute protected speech or whether recordings may be made on non-public property without the property owner’s consent.” not protected”.
Muraskin said Monday that reversing the decision would have a chilling effect on whistleblowers and a variety of undercover investigations, including sexual harassment.
North Carolina Farm Bureau attorney Jack Parker called Monday’s decision not to hear the case “disappointing and disturbing” and expressed hope that the North Carolina Legislature “will once again step up to protect our basic rights to privacy and property.”
“In the meantime, farmers and other business owners should consider themselves targets of activists and exercise caution when hiring new employees,” Parker said.
A spokesman for Stein, the state’s top law enforcement official, said his office is reviewing Monday’s decision and its implications.
Svlook
