Florida (10.21.04)

Foreshadowing the coming showdown in the United States Supreme Court over the "Beef: It's What's for Dinner" campaign, a Florida appellate court struck down a tax on citrus growers as unconstitutional.

The growers in Department of Citrus v. Graves Brothers believe the tax—all of which goes to fund the Florida Department of Citrus’ promotional campaigns—violates their freedom of speech. The Florida Department of Citrus argues that most growers want to participate in the generic promotional campaigns and that the tax funds governmental speech that is exempt from First Amendment protections.

The Second District Court of Appeal's opinion relies in part on Livestock Marketing Ass'n v. United States Department of Agriculture, where the Eighth Circuit held that the "Beef: It's What's for Dinner" campaign is not governmental speech exempt from First Amendment protections. Rather, citrus growers are more like the mushroom growers in United States v. United Foods because the citrus market is not collectivized or protected from competition. The St. Petersburg Times has more on the case here.

The United States Supreme Court will grapple with these same issues on December 8 when the Livestock Marketing case is heard (as consolidated cases Veneman v. Livestock Marketing Association, No. 04-1164, and Nebraska Cattlemen v. Livestock Marketing, No. 04-1165). Goldstein & Howe, representing Livestock Marketing, have posted the respondent’s brief here. The ABA has posted petitioners’ briefs: The brief for Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman is posted here and the brief for the Nebraska Cattlemen is posted here. Jenner & Block has a nice summary here.