In addition to claiming that the final rule violates the United States Constitution by compelling speech in the form labels on meat products that do not directly advance a substantial government interest, they say the 2013 regulation exceeds the scope of the statutory mandate because the statute does not permit the requirements the final rule puts in place.
Finally, the groups say that the rule is arbitrary and capricious, because it imposes vast burdens on the industry with little to no countervailing benefit.
Groups in favor of COOL maintain that it provides needed information to consumers making purchasing decisions.
Appellants in the case and opponents of COOL include the American Association of Meat Processors, American Meat Institute, Canadian Cattlemen's Association, Canadian Pork Council, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, National Pork Producers Council, North American Meat Association, Southwest Meat Association and Mexico's National Confederation of Livestock Organizations.
COOL Opponents Plan To Appeal Injunction Decision
Court Denies COOL Opponents' Request for Injunction
Court Grants COOL Supporters' Request to Intervene in Labeling Lawsuit
Canada Issues Formal COOL Challenge
COOL Advocates Ask to Intervene in Labeling Lawsuit
COOL Rule Opponents Seek Court Injunction