Why Have Florida and Alabama Made Lab-Grown Meat Illegal?
In recent years, the emergence of lab-grown meat has sparked a revolutionary shift in how we approach meat production. But as biotech companies pioneer the development of cultivated meat, they face both significant opportunities and substantial challenges. One of the most notable hurdles has emerged in Florida, where new legislation has banned the manufacture, distribution, and sale of lab-grown meat, igniting a legal battle that could snuff the potential for this revolutionary industry.
Meet Lab Meat
Lab-grown meat is commonly called “cultivated meat,” but also goes by other names such as “cultured meat” and “in vitro meat.” All are referring to a revolutionary approach to producing animal meat products without the need for traditional livestock farming.
The process involves taking a small sample of animal cells and growing them in a controlled laboratory environment to create meat that is biologically identical to conventionally produced meat. The cells are nurtured in a nutrient-rich medium. This allows them to multiply and differentiate into muscle fibers, fat cells, and other components that make up meat tissue.
There are lots of motivations that drive the desire to develop cultivated meat. There are various concerns associated with conventional meat production. Animal welfare issues, environmental impact, and the increasing global demand for protein are usually touted as the principal ones.
Cultivated meat would minimize animal suffering. Environmentally, it has the potential to significantly reduce the land and water needed to raise livestock as well as curtail greenhouse gas emissions that these animals produce. It would also provide a sustainable source of protein to meet the growing global demand while obviating the need for antibiotics in food production. Most relevant to Florida's opposition is the fact that it could reduce the price of meat globally.
Biotech Companies Strive to Grow Meat
While still in its early stages, several companies around the world are working to bring cultivated meat products to market, with some already receiving regulatory approval in certain countries. In December 2020, GOOD Meat became the first company in the world to receive regulatory approval for the sale of cultivated meat products in Singapore. In 2023, it cleared for sale in the United States.
Another one of those companies is UPSIDE Foods, one of the pioneers in the industry within the United States. Founded in 2015 and formerly known as Memphis Meats, the biotechnology company is at the forefront of the cellular agriculture industry. UPSIDE Foods has successfully developed prototypes of various cultivated meat products, including chicken, duck, and beef, and is working towards scaling up production to bring these products to market.
As the technology continues to develop and scale up, cultivated meat from UPSIDE or competitors could become an important part of the future food landscape, offering consumers a more sustainable and ethical alternative to traditional meat products. Of course, this can only happen if selling lab-grown meat is legal.
But why wouldn't it be? What’s the downside of UPSIDE? Well, Republicans in Florida have a lot to say about that.
Florida's Beef With Lab Meat
In May, Florida became the first state to prohibit the manufacture, distribution, and sale of cultivated meat within the state. Senate Bill 1084 passed and imposed penalties (not just fines but also imprisonment) for violations. It allows for the revocation of operating permits for food establishments that distribute or sell cultivated meat. The stated intent behind the bill, as expressed by Florida officials, was to protect the state's agricultural interests, particularly the conventional meat industry, from out-of-state competition.
In signing the bill, Republican Governor Ron DeSantis described it as an effort to “save our beef” by investing in local farmers and ranchers. He said that the state is “fighting back against the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals.” Florida Commissioner of Agriculture Wilton Simpson said in a press release: “We must protect our incredible farmers and the integrity of American agriculture. Lab-grown meat is a disgraceful attempt to undermine our proud traditions and prosperity, and is in direct opposition to authentic agriculture.”
Meat Labs Push Back
GOOD Meat expressed its disappointment about the criminalization of lab-grown meat. It posted on X: “In a state that purportedly prides itself on being a land of freedom and individual liberty, its government is now telling consumers what meat they can or cannot purchase. The law is a setback for everyone: Floridians who deserve the right to eat whatever safe and approved meat they want.”
UPSIDE’s CEO said that the passage of the bill reminded him of an “old boys club trying to have a privileged group protected and protecting an incumbent industry.” But UPSIDE Foods wasn’t content with merely publicly criticizing DeSantis. It wanted to take matters into its own hands.
Last month, the company filed a complaint in federal court in the Northern District of Florida, challenging the constitutionality of SB 1084. The defendants listed in the complaint are various Florida state officials who are responsible for the enforcement of the state's laws and regulations, including Commissioner Simpson, the Attorney General, and various state attorneys.
UPSIDE's Complaint
UPSIDE Foods claims that the Florida law violates two different clauses of the U.S. Constitution: the Supremacy Clause and the Dormant Commerce Clause. The Supremacy Clause says that the Constitution and other federal laws constitute the "supreme Law of the Land." This means that federal law takes precedence over state laws, and judges in every state are bound by the Constitution, regardless of state laws to the contrary.
UPSIDE contends that the law conflicts with the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA), which establish uniform standards for meat and poultry production and distribution. Since the USDA, in conjunction with the FDA, has approved UPSIDE's cultivated chicken product and its production facility, Florida's ban imposes additional ingredient and facility requirements that are expressly preempted by federal law.
The Dormant Commerce Clause is a legal doctrine that essentially restricts states from enacting laws that discriminate against interstate commerce. It’s intended to prevent economic protectionism and ensure a national market free from unjustified local barriers. UPSIDE argues that the Florida law banning the manufacture, distribution, and sale of cultivated meat was enacted with a discriminatory purpose (and also has the discriminatory effect) to benefit in-state agricultural interests at the expense of out-of-state competition.
What to Expect
UPSIDE also plans to apply for a preliminary injunction that would allow it to sell cultivated meat in Florida while the lawsuit is pending. The company had apparently planned to peddle its cultivated chicken at the upcoming international art fair in Miami, Art Basel.
Other efforts are being made for similar laws in Alabama, which has followed Florida's lead by enacting a similar ban on the distribution of cultivated meat. This may be a sign of a broader trend of states enacting similar prohibitions, which contributes to the fragmentation of the interstate market for cultivated meat.
A growing patchwork of state laws would complicate the ability of companies like UPSIDE to distribute their products nationally. This in theory supports the argument that such state bans create significant barriers to interstate commerce, a central issue in their Dormant Commerce Clause claim. Ironically, then, it seems that as more states try to ban lab-grown meat, the stronger the legal argument against those laws becomes.
Related Resources
- South Carolina Supreme Court Breathes New Life Into Old Execution Techniques (FindLaw's Courtside)
- Sarah Palin's Lawsuit Against NYT Revived (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
- Radioactive Contamination Lawsuit Against U.S. Navy Sinks (FindLaw's Federal Courts)