Library Search

Through litigation, legislative and administrative advocacy, and communications, Earthjustice’s Sustainable Food and Farming team advances the transition to a cleaner, safer, and more climate-friendly food system.

Trump administration shields polluters as animal factories emissions kill more people than coal plants

Conservation and community groups appealed a federal court decision upholding a Trump Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule that exempts factory farms from their duty to make information about dangerous air emissions available to the public. The decision, issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, leaves frontline communities in the dark about noxious chemicals in the air they breathe. The groups will argue on appeal that the Trump administration’s rule is unlawful.

10 organizations petition federal court over EPA’s abandonment of rules to reduce pollution from meat processing industry

Groups filed their petition with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit after the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency on August 28 announced that it would throw out rules planned by the Biden administration that would have, for the first time, imposed limits on phosphorus pollution from 126 meat industry plants across the U.S., eliminating at least eight million pounds of this pollutant per year, plus nine million pounds of nitrogen and other pollutants, including fecal bacteria and grease.

A dive into food and agriculture greenhouse gas emissions and net greenhouse gas reduction pathways

The Superior Court for the District of Columbia denied Tyson Food, Inc.’s efforts to avoid liability and allowed the case to move forward.

Judge Julie H. Becker denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss.

Further industrializing animal agriculture is a short-sighted and dangerous response to food security; broader thinking leads to far better answers.

Overburdened communities in North Carolina face the harshest impacts of industrial animal production. Now, they’re taking a stand.

We’re suing one of the largest meat companies in the world for trying to deceive consumers about its climate impact.

Un grupo ambientalista acusa a la compañía de aprovecharse del interés de los consumidores en comprar alimentos favorables al clima, ya que afirma falsamente que alcanzará medidas ‘cero neto’ para 2050 con la comercialización de sus productos de carne industrial como ‘climáticamente inteligentes’

The Environmental Working Group filed the suit under the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act, or CPPA, in D.C. Superior Court. The suit targets Tyson’s claims that its industrial meat production operations will reach net-zero greenhouse gas, or GHG, emissions by 2050 and that it produces “climate-smart” beef. EWG is represented by Animal Legal Defense Fund, Earthjustice, Edelson PC, and FarmSTAND,

Environmental group accuses Tyson of capitalizing on consumers’ interest in purchasing climate-friendly foods by falsely claiming it will be net-zero by 2050 and marketing its industrial beef products as “climate-smart”

Earthjustice and partners urge the Treasury Department to prohibit electricity producers that use biogas from animal manure from receiving Clean Electricity Tax Credits.

Peter Lehner, Managing Attorney, Sustainable Food & Farming Program: “Consumers are beginning to be aware of the fact that meat, and particularly beef, has a very, very high climate impact. JBS is fully aware of this, and trying to get ahead of that by telling consumers, ‘Oh, don’t worry, we’ve got it under control.’ But…

Stronger standards would prevent hundreds of millions of pounds of pollution from reaching rivers and streams, helping to protect more than 22 million people

Inadequately controlled water pollution from slaughterhouses and rendering facilities can make water unsafe for drinking, unfit for outdoor recreation, and uninhabitable for aquatic life, posing serious risks to human health and the environment, especially in vulnerable and under-resourced communities. After more than two decades, EPA finally has begun the process of strengthening water pollution control standards for these facilities, and the Agency now proposes to adopt the weakest of three regulatory options. EPA’s preferred option is inconsistent with the CWA and other federal laws.