U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Appeal in Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality of Beef Checkoff

DENVER (Nov. 27, 2001) - The U.S. Supreme Court Nov. 26 denied without comment Kansas cattleman and order buyer Jerry Goetz’s request for appeal in his claim that he should not have to pay the $1-per-head beef checkoff. Goetz alleges that the beef checkoff program is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case is the second time the high court has refused to hear Goetz’s appeal from a 1998 determination by the U.S. Court of Appeals that found the beef checkoff program to be constitutional. Further, it lets stand the appellate court’s April 2001 ruling that Goetz must pay past-due checkoff assessments, late fees and penalties for his intentional non-compliance with the beef checkoff law.

“The decision not to hear the appeal is appropriate and good news for beef producers who have invested in the beef checkoff program and the successful ‘Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner.^{®’ promotion campaign,” said Lynn Cornwell, Montana cattle producer and president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. “It seems to send a clear message to those who are trying to take away the industry’s only self-help promotion and marketing program. We believe the checkoff is constitutional.”}

^{Goetz filed his latest request for appeal with the Supreme Court on Aug. 9, 2001, following previous rejections by the federal District Court in Kansas, the 10th Circuit and the Supreme Court in 1999. Goetz argued that the April 2001 ruling against him by the10th Circuit Appeals Court should be vacated and reconsidered in light of the Supreme Court’s June 2001 ruling in United States vs. United Foods, Inc. involving the Mushroom Promotion Act. The United Foods case considered the constitutionality of advertising conducted through the mushroom industry’s checkoff program, which is written and administered differently than the beef checkoff program.}

^{“The beef checkoff program was designed by beef producers for beef producers,” said Cornwell. “It only stands to reason that a program designed for the mushroom industry would have little or no bearing on beef. It’s unfortunate that groups like the Livestock Marketing Association choose to obstruct with lengthy and expensive legal battles the industry’s efforts to promote beef and move our current record supplies. Further,” continued Cornwell, “the beef checkoff has withstood all previous constitutional challenges.}

^{“The national beef checkoff program just celebrated its 15th anniversary of conducting programs designed to influence producers’ bottom lines,” said Cornwell. “The program has always had USDA oversight and accountability. In 15 years, the only significant change to the program has been that it has become even more effective in the work that it does. The hundreds of producers at the state and national level who participate in determining the direction of checkoff programs are becoming savvier in how to market beef products to consumers. I believe that’s a big reason we’ve seen consumer beef demand rise over the past three years.”}

^{A hearing in LMA’s lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the beef checkoff program has been tentatively scheduled for Dec. 20 in Aberdeen, S.D.}

# # #

Producer-directed and consumer-focused, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association is the  trade association of America’s cattle farmers and ranchers, and the marketing organization for the largest segment of the nation’s food and fiber industry.