This work led to our rescuing thousands of individuals, including animals who’d been discarded in trash cans and on piles of dead animals, and the pictures and videotape we obtained have helped educate millions of people about the cruelty behind the production of meat, dairy, and eggs. We believe that consumers have a right to know where their food comes from. For decades, we have opposed agribusiness’ efforts to prevent awareness and public discourse about the egregious suffering cows, pigs, chickens and other animals endure in our food system.

On February 23, 2023, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled North Carolina’s Property Protection Act (the Act) as unconstitutional, more specifically noting that undercover investigations and whistleblowing are activities protected by the First Amendment. This ruling follows nearly five years of litigation instigated by a coalition of public interest groups: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), Center for Food Safety, Food & Water Watch, Government Accountability Project, The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), Farm Forward, and Farm Sanctuary who challenged the Act for its clear violation of the most fundamental of citizens’ First Amendment rights.

The Act aims to punish “any person who intentionally gains access to the nonpublic areas of another’s premises and engages in an act that exceeds the person’s authority to enter.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 99A-2(a). It also includes prohibiting an individual from creating a recording or image and using it to breach the loyalty of that employer. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 99A-2(b). As written, the Act not only prohibits undercover investigations in factory farms, but also in facilities such as nursing homes and daycares.

Thankfully, most end up being struck down by the courts, citing a violation of First Amendment rights. In that sense, this ruling is no different, however, the Fourth Circuit takes its determination of unconstitutionality a step further, by noting that the Act is viewpoint discriminatory; meaning, there is no prohibition on otherwise identical activities that would paint the employer in a positive light. This distinction is illustrative of a clear violation of the First Amendment.

The North Carolina decision marks another positive step toward the pattern of United States courts ruling in favor of accountability and transparency for an industry that has thrived by living in the shadows. Another example of this trend is in the recent case against Direct Action Everywhere (DXE) activists, Wayne Hsiung and Paul Picklesimer, who were tried for theft after rescuing two sick piglets from a factory farm in Utah. They were both acquitted by a jury in 2022.

Hsiung, who recently spoke at our Open Your Heart Valentine’s Day event, wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times, “Perhaps the jury verdict in our case is a sign that more people are rethinking whether their diets should include meat. Historically, many social movements have experienced sudden upswings in support, often in response to people taking risky actions that force the moral issue to the fore.”

Hopefully, the continuation of court rulings in animal agriculture cases that favor accountability and transparency will force the moral issue to the fore and a desperately needed change in animal welfare practices within the industry.