The judge in Lancaster who is handling the civil trial case of Amos Miller has chosen not to specifically limit the Amish farmer’s sales outside of Pennsylvania. The judge believes that the unclear nature of Pennsylvania law should not be held against Miller.
Miller may be allowed to sell his raw milk produced in Pennsylvania to customers in other states.
The decision was made by County Judge Thomas Sponaugle in the case of Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) V. Amos and Rebecca Miller. This happened after the Millers’ attorneys, Bradford L. Geyer and Robert E. Barnes, presented their arguments in defense.
The judge wanted to make his March 19 order clearer. The order said that Miller’s sales were not allowed in Pennsylvania, but they were allowed in other places. PDA requested the court to create a boundary around Miller’s unpasteurized milk and prevent it from being transported to other states.
The state is unlikely to agree with it, but it does demonstrate the significant differences between the Millers and their state. The judge stated that the court should not use the ambiguity as a reason to blame the defendants.
The number of Miller patrons who are from out-of-state is not known. Some people believe that he has around 4,000 to 5,000 customers. It is not known how much the new order will help Miller, as he agreed to follow federal food safety laws by signing a Consent Decree last year. According to federal law, it is still not allowed to sell raw milk between different states.
Also Read: Student is in Custody After Shooting Classmate in the Leg
Miller came to PDA’s attention on January 23rd when eggnog bought from the farm was connected to cases of food-borne illness in New York and Michigan. Afterwards, the PAR discovered that Miller was conducting business without the necessary licenses and permits from the state.
Pennsylvania is a state where raw milk is allowed, and it has around 115 licensed facilities. However, the state has a problem with Miller, as they struggle to obtain routine paperwork to conduct their business.
The Miller’s attorneys stated that the law is clear and only applies to sales made to customers in Pennsylvania within the state. The language that the PDA wants to add, “from the Commonwealth” and “regardless of where customers reside,” is not currently included in the statute. It couldn’t exist according to the Constitution.
“The food laws control how Pennsylvania customers can access food because that’s what the legislature decided and what the Constitution permits them to do. These laws don’t regulate producers, processors, or sellers of food that is meant to be exported to markets outside of Pennsylvania,” it argues. “Think about the chaotic situation caused by the PDA’s change to the law they are requesting this court to make.
Now, anyone who is traveling through Pennsylvania with food that they plan to sell outside of the state is under the control and limitations of the PDA. This means that someone who is traveling from West Virginia through Pennsylvania to another state with food that they plan to sell outside of Pennsylvania can be stopped, searched, confiscated, fined, legally prevented from doing something, penalized, and even put in prison.”
Facilities in Pennsylvania that produce, process, and transport food for export would be banned overnight. This would affect thousands of people employed in Pennsylvania and could potentially benefit criminals. The legislature did not approve of this, and it is also not allowed by the Constitution. Food intended for export is already regulated by Congress, as shown by the Defendants’ five years of litigation, despite PDA’s claims.
Leave a Reply