Products containing genetically modified ingredients would have to disclose that information on the back of the package near the nutritional facts under Vermont’s bill. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger
Vermont has raised more than $300,000 in private donations since May to help defend its GMO labeling law in federal court.
SumOfUs, a nonprofit issue advocacy organization headquartered in Washington, D.C., made the largest donation — $78,000 — to a defense fund to help the state pay its legal bills.
National trade groups this summer sued the state, saying the law requiring food manufacturers and retailers to label certain products containing genetically engineered ingredients starting in 2016 is unconstitutional. Attorney General Bill Sorrell last month asked the court to throw out the case.
The state has received more than 1,000 private donations to defend its labeling law, Act 120, according to the state Department of Finance and Management. State officials estimate it could cost as much as $8 million to defend the law.
Jerry Greenfield and Gov. Peter Shumlin unveil “Food Fight Fudge Brownie” outside the Ben & Jerry’s scoop shop on Church Street in Burlington. Photo by Anne Galloway/VTDigger
The Colorado-based Mexican restaurant chain, Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., donated $50,000 last week. The Vermont ice cream company Ben & Jerry’s also donated $5,000 through the sale of “Food Fight Fudge Brownie” ice cream.
Private individuals and advocacy groups want to help Vermont defend what could be the nation’s first GMO labeling law. Other high profile donors include liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org and the private foundation Ceres Trust — each donated about $50,000.
Vermonters have donated about $16,000 to date, approximately 5 percent of the total amount.
SumOfUs has more than 5 million members worldwide and is seeking up to 50,000 donors to support Vermont’s labeling law. The donations range up to $500 or more, and the group has received more than 22,000 donations, according to its website. The group also supports a host of other causes, including environmental, labor and animal rights issues.
Two consumer advocacy groups, the Center for Food Safety and the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, have asked for permission to join the state in its defense of the law in federal court. The Grocery Manufacturers Association and other trade groups in the case asked the court to reject this motion. Vermont does not oppose the advocacy groups’ motion to intervene in the case.
The Center for Food Safety was granted a motion to intervene in a lawsuit involving an ordinance passed by Kauai County in Hawaii to regulate pesticides and GMOs. A federal judge in August ruled in favor of Syngenta Seeds Inc. and other biotechnology companies that sued the county and against GMO regulation proponents.
In another case involving a Hawaii County ordinance regulating GMOs, a federal court Aug. 22 denied the Center for Food Safety’s motion to intervene, stating the group did not prove it had an interest in the case that could not be represented by the county. GMA and the other groups cited the Hawaii ruling, again asking the Vermont federal court to deny the motion.
George Kimbrell, a senior attorney for the Center for Food Safety, said the Vermont law is different because it is a statewide labeling requirement on products containing GMOs — not a county ordinance on GMO or pesticide regulation. He said the Hawaii federal court rulings will not set a precedent for Vermont.
“The legal arguments in Hawaii are completely different,” he said.
Kimbrell said VPIRG and the Center for Food Safety have a significant interest in the Vermont case because it affects their members in Vermont and across the country. He also said the case relates to the organizations’ missions.
Another point, although less important Kimbrell said, is the that state may not have the resources to defend the law on its own.
“Act 120’s Food Fight Fund illustrates that the Vermont Legislature had significant concerns about the costs of implementing and defending Act 120,” the two groups told a U.S. District Court judge on Aug. 25. The groups also said the state is now “wrestling with budget cuts after a recent downgrade in revenue projections.”
However, the Attorney General’s Office said on Aug. 7 the state “fully intends to vigorously defend Act 120” and the labeling law “itself imposes no financial restriction on the state’s ability to defend the law,” according to court documents.
GMA is seeking to overturn Vermont’s law with the Snack Food Association, the International Dairy Foods Association and the National Association of Manufacturers.
Vermont has hired a Washington, D.C., law firm to help defend the law. Russell, Englert, Orseck, Untereiner & Sauber was awarded a $1.5 million contract.
The post State receives $78,000 check for GMO defense fund appeared first on VTDigger.
