Vermont Law School: A Breath of Fresh Air For Food Law Enthusiasts

Written by Talia Ralph, 3L at McGill Law and 2018-2019 FLSN Projects Chair

image4

There’s something about staring out the window of your environmental law classroom to see trees, mountains, and sky that really changes your perspective for the better. Or at least, it has changed mine.

I was definitely looking for a change of scenery when I signed up for the summer exchange program at Vermont Law School. After two years at my distinctly urban law faculty (I’m a rising 3L at McGill Law) and an entire life spent in concrete jungles, I thought a month or two in the wilderness would anchor the research and work I do on food policy. While cities have no shortage of important food-related issues to tackle, I’ve often felt that my understanding of agriculture and rural food systems could use a boost. I also figured my law-addled brain could use a bit of a break, if only in the form of occasional hikes and swims in the White River which flows by the campus.

image2

That being said, I wasn’t really expecting to put my brain on pause. Vermont Law’s summer session is unlike any academic program I’ve ever come across; it’s jam-packed with incredible intensive classes taught by leading academics and practitioners from around the country and even the world. I guess even experts are lured by the promise of Vermont’s natural beauty, which might explain why thought leaders come to lecture twice weekly on “hot topics” in the fields of food and environmental law.

As the the leading environmental law school in the United States, and one of the only schools with a full-fledged food law and policy concentration, Vermont Law is a dreamy place to spend a semester if you have hopes of working in food law or policy. In addition to Environmental Law, I was able to take an advanced environmental legal research class (where I focused on food waste in hospital settings); study strategic food justice litigation from a D.C.-based food lawyer at Public Justice; and immerse myself in a 72-hour mediation seminar taught by the lead mediator for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.  

image5

The campus is also a truly special place. It embodies so many values that food and environmental advocates and community members have been pushing for (and practicing) for years. The cafe serves fresh food that is sourced locally, including vegan and vegetarian options at every meal; low-sugar drinks and homemade baked goods line the shelves. In the bathrooms, the toilets are compostable; in the hallways, people leave bunches of wildflowers or fresh rhubarb from their gardens to share. In legal culture, where being cut-throat and competitive is often rewarded, I can’t express enough how refreshing it was to be in a place as collaborative and collective as Vermont Law School.

Next week, I’m packing a 60-pound backpack and heading into the wilds of Montana with a group of 15 or so other law students and a law professor to learn about public land management. They call it the “Montana Field Study”. I’m not sure that there is any other law school in the world that offers students the opportunity to study wildlife management laws while wandering through the clearcut woodlands those laws were written to protect. I’m especially looking forward to the once-in-a-lifetime experience of talking about the effects of climate change while cooking under what I have heard is quite a big, beautiful sky.

image1
I’ll let you know how it all goes. In the meantime, you might want to keep an eye out for the application to Vermont Law School’s next summer session.

The Jams and Jellies Exception to the Added Sugars Line: A Mountain or a Molehill?

JellyWritten by Seth Gitner, 3L at Georgetown, 2017-2018 Student Orgs. Co-Chair

In May of 2016 the FDA announced that it would be amending its labeling regulations by updating the nutrition facts panel.[1] One of the updates to the nutrition facts panel is going to be a line for added sugars.[2] The FDA, after reviewing scientific data, determined that it is difficult to meet nutrient needs while staying within the recommended calorie limits if an individual consumes more than 10 percent of their daily calories from added sugar.[3] A suggested limit to be placed on the intake of added sugars in the diet is supported by the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the American Heart Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Institute of Medicine, and the World Health Organization.[4] The reason for these recommendations, which were mentioned above, include the fact that excessive consumption of added sugars can contribute to obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.[5]

Added sugars, for the purpose of the nutrition facts panel, includes sugars that are added during the processing, or that are packaged as such, and includes “sugars from syrups and honey, and sugars from concentrated fruit or vegetable juices that are in excess of what would be expected from the same volume of 100 percent fruit or vegetable juice of the same type.[6] There is a notable exclusions for juice concentrates used to formulate the fruit component of jellies, jams, or preserves, or the fruit component of fruit spreads.[7] The rationale behind this exclusion for jams, jellies, and fruit spreads is unclear.

Jellies are a combination of fruit juice and “one or any combination of the optional ingredients” provided in the standard of identity for “fruit jelly,” which is then concentrated. [8] The fruit juice component must be the “filtered or strained liquid extracted with or without the application of heat and with or without the application of water,” from one of a number of approved fresh, frozen, or canned fruits.[9] This juice can be concentrated before becoming a component of the jelly making process.[10] In a comment to the rule it was suggested that that the characterizing fruit and fruit juices in these product should be excluded from the definition of added sugar because they do not serve as sugar substitutes, and are not added for the purpose of sweetening a food.[11] The FDA, in response to this comment, stated that because “fruit juice concentrates may be used as ingredients in fruit jellies, jams, and preserves, we have excluded those fruit juice concentrates that are used in accordance with the standards of identity.[12]

The FDA’s decision to exclude fruit juice concentrates used in the formulation of the fruit components of jams and jellies is not entirely consistent with other portions of the definition. The reasoning the FDA offered for why added sugars are going to be included on the nutrition facts panel was the it was difficult to meet nutrient needs when added sugars make up more than 10% of a person’s diet.[13] The definition of added sugar includes concentrated fruit juice that has more sugar than the same volume of 100 percent fruit juices of the same type.[14] To go along with a comment recommending these concentrated juices be excluded in jams and jellies because they are not added to sweeten the food, but rather as an ingredient, does not reasonably follow.[15]

As interesting as this exception appears, the question remains: is this a big deal? For people who consume a large quantity of jams and jellies this exception could lead to a consumer’s unknowing consumption of added sugar. Nonetheless, it is unlikely to lead to a level of consumption of added sugar that would be likely to cause serious harm on its own. This could also be problematic and could potentially lead to jams and jellies being used as a sweetener for certain products because it offers a discount on added sugars, i.e. requires only a labeling of some and not all of what would otherwise be considered added sugars, which could potentially mislead consumers. However, as of now there is no evidence that this is happening. As new regulations are enacted it is interesting to observe the response of industry. As for the jams and jellies exception for the added sugars line, only time will tell if it is a mountain or a molehill.

[1] 81 FR 33742­­.

[2] Id.

[3] Food and Drug Administration, Changes to the Nutrition Facts Label, https://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/LabelingNutrition/ucm385663.htm.

[4] Id.

[5] Harvard Men’s Health Watch, Supra note 1.

[6] 21 CFR 101.9(c)(6)(iii)

[7] Id. The definition of added sugars does not include, “fruit juice concentrates which are used to formulate the fruit component of jellies, jams, or preserves in accordance with the standard of identities set forth in §§ 150.140 and 150.160 of this chapter, or the fruit component of fruit spreads.” 21 CFR 101.9(c)(6)(iii).

[8] 21 CFR 150.140(a)

[9] 21 CFR 150.140(b).

[10] If this juice could not be concentrated before addition and further concentration in the jelly making process, the statement “fruit juice concentrates which are used to formulate the fruit component of jellies” in 21 CFR 101.9(c)(6)(iii) would be meaningless.

[11] 81 FR 33837.

[12] Id.

[13] Changes to the Nutrition Facts Label, supra note 55.

[14] 21 CFR 101.9(c)(6)(iii).

[15] 81 FR 33837.

2017-2018 FLSN Executive Board Reflections

IMG_2761

Want to know what it’s like to be on the FLSN executive board? Check out the following reflections from some of our 2017-2018 executive board members!

This past year I served as a Careers Chair on the FLSN Executive Board. One of the primary aims of the Food Law Student Network is to facilitate connections between interested students and professionals practicing Food Law. This is especially important for students without a food law society at their own law school. In support of this aim, the Careers Chair searches for and organizes potential internships and professional opportunities to distribute across the network. As a niche practice area, this often involves fostering new connections and networks where none existed before. I really enjoyed the chance to learn more about the wide-range of possible careers paths for foodies with a legal education! – Zoe Grant, Careers Co-Chair

Serving on the FLSN Executive Committee was a valuable opportunity to engage with students, faculty, and practitioners dedicated to food law and policy issues nationwide. In particular, working on the Careers Committee enabled me to develop and disseminate resources for students interested in pursuing careers in food law and policy. – Eliza Pan, Careers Co-Chair

Being on the FLSN Executive Board was an invaluable experience.  This year, I served as the Careers Co-Chair alongside Zoe Grant and Eliza Pan.  Serving on the Executive Board helped to connect me to other students who shared a passion for food and agricultural law and policy and who wanted to share opportunities with other law students across the nation.  Being a Careers Co-Chair broadened my understanding of the diverse career opportunities there are for law students to pursue. – Mallory Neumann, Careers Co-Chair

What is better than serving on a board with people who are as passionate about food as you are?  Being on the FLSN executive board not only gave me a space to nerd out with others about food topics, but it also helped diversify my ideas about what food law is actually comprised of as a whole. From CAFOs to restaurant employment issues, food law is a a vast subject area. Getting to help create resources for others to experience the wealth of knowledge this group of people have was something I could not have done anywhere else. – Kristina Ellis, Communication Co-Chair

It has been exciting to be a part of this young organization filled with idealistic and impassioned future food lawyers. Though we all come together around our shared interest in this emerging field of law, the organization is young and in many ways still trying to find its purpose. Though this can be frustrating to some, I found it exciting. We have been able to connect people at different law schools throughout North America around a common interest, and it’s exciting to work with the other board members as we try to use this network to bring positive change to the food system. – Seth Gitner, Student Orgs Co-Chair

 

Being a member of the FLSN board was an awesome experience. I was able to connect with students who worked with outside organizations on their research projects, helping those students gain experience in food law and build valuable professional relationships. The other members of the board were also great to work with. I knew I could reach out to any of them for feedback on my work as a Projects Chair, or just to pick their brains about the work they are doing at their respective schools. I enjoyed my time on the board, and am proud to have been a representative for food law students. – Hannah Catt, Projects Co-Chair

 

Being on the FLSN board has been an incredible experience. I have had the opportunity to work with so many people from so many different backgrounds. As a Projects Co-Chair I worked on the Farm Bill Project. We did research so the Harvard Food Law Policy Clinic and other groups could assemble recommendations for lawmakers. As part of the FLSN board, I gave input on Summit planning and created an entirely new project, which will assist FLSN members in changing their university’s procurement policies. It has been an incredible year and I am so happy that I had the chance to work with such an amazing group of people.- Sarah Luther, Projects Co-Chair

Another Semester, Another Chance to Start a Food Law Society

foodWritten by: Rebecca Gobeil, Boston College Law School 3L, 2017-2018 Vice President of FLSN

Starting a Food Law organization at a law school is not always easy. While the field of Food and Agriculture law is extremely fascinating and many folks would be interested in it; it is hard to get folks excited about something they know nothing about. Food law interacts with so many other areas of the law: immigration law, labor law, environmental law as well as laws and policy to do with government and regulation; and approaching it this way can garner interest in the food law society at your school. Another way to start is to find an area or issue that is small enough to tackle locally so folks can feel that you are effecting real change and they are excited to get involved.

I have been brainstorming along with some others interested in food law about what can garner others interest in the field of study. One of the major ways is to connect these fields addressed earlier with food law. Invite an immigration lawyer who has worked with migrant farmers to speak with your law school so they can understand that the fields greatly interact. Similarly invite a labor lawyer interested in helping folks within the restaurant industry – particularly someone involved with the Sanctuary Restaurant movement; a movement where folks are committed to protecting those working in the restaurant industry no matter their background or immigration status. There is also so much room for crossover between food law and environmental law; whether that be concerning food waste, pesticides, waste water, air pollution or any other number of crossover topics. These crossover areas allow folks committed to other areas of the law to understand that food law is intermingled so closely to their chosen fields and it is an area that should be paid attention to and closely followed.

The other way to garner interest and start an organization is to start small. At my law school myself and another student interested in food law are looking at policies involving food waste at our school. We are hoping that taking steps to effect real change at our own school will lead others to be interested in food law and how it can affect the future of not only our school but our environment. When looking at an issue such as food waste we as students will look to regulations as well as school and local politics. Effecting real change is something nearly everyone in law school can get behind and get excited about.

What I have learned through law school and through life is that the most important thing to do is to start. So if there is no food law presence at your school but you are passionate about it take a small step. Talk to your friend group about how prevalent it is in other fields of law; focus on a small topic that affects your community; talk to your environmental/immigration/labor law community about bringing in a speaker that deals with food law. Just start, you never know whose attention and what excitement you will draw!

The Agricultural and Food Law LL.M. at the University of Arkansas

booksWritten by: Erika Dunyak, LL.M. Student at the University of Arkansas

Hello Food Law Student Network Members!

I am an alumnus of the Network, myself, and am currently a student in the Agricultural and Food Law LL.M. at the University of Arkansas. The LL.M. is a great option for students or practitioners interested in expanding their understanding of food or agricultural law.

My experience with the program has been incredibly engaging and exciting. I have been able to take courses in the subjects that really matter to me. The experience to engage in coursework, rather than reading on my own time, has been stimulating. Courses at UArk are taught by leaders in their respective fields. Here’s just a taste of the courses I’ve been able to take:

  • Food Justice
  • Agricultural Cooperatives and Local Foods
  • Right to Food
  • Agricultural Policy and the Federal Budget
  • Food, Farming and Sustainability
  • Food Safety Litigation Strategies
  • Agriculture and the Environment
  • Special Issues in Indigenous Food and Agriculture
  • Urban Agriculture
  • Food Labeling
  • Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Human Rights in the Food and Agricultural Sector
  • Independent Research in Agricultural Labor
  • Food Safety

LL.M. courses are only 1-2 credit hours, meaning you can cram a lot of material into the 24 credit hour program.

I have found the professional and academic support at the UArk LL.M. to be second to none. I have had the opportunity to have near-weekly meetings with Susan Schneider and have developed a close professional relationship with her. For those of you who don’t know Susan, she is one of the founders of food law and a long-time agricultural law scholar.

The program is flexible and students can participate at a distance. However, students in residence may be eligible for graduate assistantships that cover tuition and a small stipend.

This video technology also works the other way. The program has been able to get in experts in to teach courses through the program’s video technology. Professors can video in to a cutting-edge video conference enabled classroom. The other option allows for condensed courses. In these courses, are all-day for about three days.

The program has an unbelievable network — you’ve almost certainly already come across some of its graduates if you’re this far into your food law interest.

But, for me, the biggest benefit of the program was not having to settle. I knew that I wanted to practice food law. I applied to the LL.M. and was accepted for a graduate assistantship in January of my 3L year. I knew that I had some plan that would get me working on food law issues. I was freed up to only apply for food law jobs. I didn’t have to take the job that I didn’t want working at my county’s prosecutor’s office until I could find something that was food related. The LL.M. has provided me with the opportunity to build my resume, get published, make connects, be a part of an amazing alumni network, and essentially hit the employment search running, rather than from the standstill of 3L.

Finally, Fayetteville is an amazing town tucked in the Ozark mountains. It is a great place to live and play and work. There is good food, great bars, great local theatre, beautiful scenery and Northwest Arkansas is home to one of the premiere modern and American art museums in the country.

Please get in touch with me if you have any questions about the program or about Fayetteville. Feel free to shoot me an email to EDunyak@uark.edu!

Cheers!

Erika Dunyak

What to do When Your Food Law Society Doesn’t Get Funding

Written by: Kristina Ellis- a 2L at University of Denver

DU Food Law Society Volunteer Day
DU Food Law Society Volunteer Day

The Budget Requests have been turned in, the semester begins, and your Student Bar Association (SBA) issues your budget. You open the email to find out that you’ve received no funding for the year. Suddenly the planning of every event, lunch talk, and happy hour comes to a screeching halt. This year the University of Denver- Food Law Society (DUFLS) faced this fate. Getting our budget for the school year with felt like a death sentence. Our budget was spent the second we received it. The entire budget of $125 for the year was spent on supplies for an upcoming student organization fair for 1Ls.

Realizing that your student organization doesn’t have any money to put on fun events for the school year isn’t a death sentence. It’s actually a blessing. Once our executive board sat down and discussed our lack of funding, we were able to start brainstorming some creative, free or low-cost events. Events at DU usually involve putting on a happy hour in the school or providing lunch with a panel talk. A lot of student orgs in the law school tend to be very successful in drawing in 1Ls to their organization.

Last year, we took this approach in the spring. We held one lunch panel, with great food, and speakers from different parts of food law. The event had about 25 attendees, mainly there for the free food. Most of the students who attended the lunch panel sat with their laptops open doing work for their afternoon classes or responding to emails. The typical law school student org events don’t always work. Our team, without a budget, was tasked with finding events to break the mold. And here’s what we came up with:

  • Volunteering at a Food Bank
  • Volunteering at a Local Urban Garden
  • Exhibit on Food Deserts and Tour of a Local Food Desert
  • Tour of Local Brewery
  • Ask a Local Firm to Host Lunch or a Happy Hour

Handsome Brook Farm, LLC v. Humane Farm Animal Care, Inc. — Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Written by: Hannah Catt- a 3L at University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

download

Don’t Put All Your Eggs in One Basket: Court Affirms Humane Farm Animal Care’s Email was False Advertising

Handsome Brook Farm, LLC, is an egg producer that distributes its products in grocery stores in the United States. Humane Farm Animal Care, Inc. (HFAC) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit that offers certifications for egg producers that meet HFAC’s standards for humane treatment of laying hens. As a non-profit, HFAC receives a portion of the sales (plus other fees) from products with its “Certified Humane” label. Having the HFAC label on a product may make it more appealing to consumers who value animal welfare in food production, because HFAC sets its own standards for how animals must be treated.

In April 2016, the employee of another egg producer contacted HFAC, saying he knew people at a facility that packed Handsome Brook eggs. The employee further reported that the eggs “were not pasture raised, but were being packed in cartons with pasture raised labeling.” Unrelated to the claims made by the employee, HFAC audited the facility one month later. The HFAC auditor filed a report saying Handsome Brook’s certifications were expired.

On May 20, 2016, the Executive Director of HFAC, Adele Douglass, sent an email to thirty-six large retailers, including Costco, Harris Teeter, Kroger, Publix, Safeway, Target, and Whole Foods. These businesses either had a partnership with HFAC or were considering carrying Handsome Brook eggs. The email said that HFAC was prompted by a whistleblower complaint to inspect a facility that packed HFAC “Certified Humane” eggs, in addition to Handsome Brook eggs. The email continued that the “Pasture Raised” statement on Handsome Brook cartons could not be validated, and that none of the eggs being packed at the time of the inspection were pasture raised nor were they “American Humane Certified.” The email also reported that Handsome Brook’s organic certification was not up-to-date. The email closed by urging the stores to “reconsider changing suppliers.”

Before sending the email, HFAC did not contact Handsome Brook’s certifiers or make attempts to confirm the truth of the audit report. Because of the email, stores pulled Handsome Brook’s eggs, temporarily or indefinitely, and a proposed retail partner delayed its introduction of the product.

Handsome Brook initiated suit, claiming the email was false advertising under the Lanham Act. With its complaint, it included current organic certifications from the three egg producers it worked with, in addition to affidavits from the American Humane Association confirming that Handsome Brook and its affiliated producers had passed timely audits. The District Court initially provided Handsome Brook with a temporary restraining order, but later granted a preliminary injunction as well, and required HFAC to publish a retraction email.

The Fourth Circuit reviewed the granting of the preliminary injunction for abuse of discretion. A preliminary injunction is properly granted if (1) the plaintiff will likely succeed on the merits, (2) the plaintiff will likely suffer irreparable harm if the preliminary injunction is denied, (3) the balance of equities favors granting a preliminary injunction, and (4) the public interest counsels

in favor of granting the preliminary injunction. Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008).

The court first considered language in the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a)(1)(B), which forbids untrue or deceptive statements “in commercial advertising or promotion” that improperly represent another’s product. Because the Lanham Act does not provide a definition for “commercial advertising or promotion,” the court turned to a test out of the Southern District of New York. In that test, commercial advertising or promotion is defined as (1) commercial speech (2) by a defendant in commercial competition with the plaintiff (3) for the purpose of influencing consumers to buy goods or services, and the representations (4) must be sufficiently disseminated to the relevant purchasing public to constitute advertising or promotion within that industry. Gordon & Breach Sci. Publishers v. Am. Inst. Of Physics, 859 F. Supp. 1521, 1536 (S.D.N.Y. 1994). The Fourth Circuit has adopted a modified version of this test which excludes the second factor.

Commercial speech receives less protection under the First Amendment. The court found that HFAC was primarily motivated by commercial interests when it sent its email. This conclusion was based on the fact that the recipients of the email were grocers that could sell HFAC-certified products. Additionally, the email mentioned HFAC’s certification, comparing it to others in a way that presented it as superior.

The court further found that Handsome Brook suffered irreparable harm and would continue to if its injunction was denied. Handsome Brook’s allegations, found to be true by the district court, were that two grocers had stopped selling Handsome Brook Eggs and one had postponed a rollout of the product. Additionally, the contents of the email had been shared outside of the recipients, and one individual heard it being discussed at a trade show.

In coming to its conclusion, the court rejected HFAC’s defenses of truth, unconstitutional prior restraint on speech, and improperly compelled speech. The email could not be considered true where, among other things, HFAC did not conduct its audit based on the “whistleblower” report. Additionally, as the court noted, prior restraints are constitutionally permissible to stop false and misleading commercial speech. Finally, the State has an interest in protecting consumers from false and misleading speech. Thus, where the nature of the speech in this case is commercial, the compulsion is allowable.

The full opinion may be found at http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Unpublished/161813.U.pdf

Full case summary on the ABA 4th Circuit blog may be found at https://apps.americanbar.org/ababoards/blog/blogpost.cfm?threadid=34255&catid=14913

The Florida Gubernatorial Fellows Program

Written by: Mallory Newman- 3L at Florida State University 

Image- Mallory FLSN

 

Hello FLSN members! I am Mallory Neumann a 3L at Florida State University College of Law and a Careers Co-Chair for FLSN. As Careers Co-Chairs, Zoe Grant and I plan to share internship and career opportunities in food law with FLSN members. Today, I would like to share an exciting experience that I am currently participating in.

I am a member of Class XIII of the Florida Gubernatorial Fellows Program. The program was created by a past governor to provide students with the ability to learn from top officials in state government. Fellows participate in a weekly lecture series with state leadership, policy trips around the state, and work part-time at a state agency. Fellows are placed at an agency and work on a project that aligns with their interests. As a law student interested in food and agricultural issues, I was placed at the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Office of General Counsel. Fellows also engage in an independent comprehensive research project to identify and propose solutions to an issue facing Florida.

At the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, I am working on implementing the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) at the state level. FSMA was signed into law by President Obama in 2011 in response to major foodborne illness outbreaks and bioterrorism concerns. The law attempts to shift the focus to prevention of contamination before it reaches the consumer instead of reaction to outbreaks. The FDA has promulgated major rules to implement FSMA including the Produce Safety Rule, Preventive Controls for Human Food, and Preventive Controls for Food for Animals.

My fellowship centers primarily on assisting the Department in implementing the Produce Safety Rule since Florida is a significant producer of fruits and vegetables. Florida ranks first in the United States for production value of oranges, fresh tomatoes, watermelons, grapefruit, sugarcane, fresh snap beans, and fresh cucumbers and ranks second for bell peppers, strawberries, fresh sweet corn, spring potatoes, peanuts, tangerines, and avocados. Many of these produce growers are subject to the science-based minimum standards required by the Produce Safety Rule and look to the Department to assist them in complying. Through the fellowship, I assist the Department’s Office of General Counsel and Division of Fruit and Vegetables in identifying the legal and policy implications of the Department’s decisions in choosing how to implement the rule.

I believe that the Gubernatorial Fellows Program is a unique opportunity because I have the ability to gain both legal and public policy experience. The Program is open to undergraduate and graduate students in any discipline, which provides a broader experience than other legal internships. The independent research project is also a unique opportunity because Fellows have access to government data and experts to determine the most appropriate solution to the identified issue.

I highly encourage students interested in public policy to seek out similar opportunities in their state. If your state does not have a similar program, seek out opportunities through your state legislature by contacting a representative or committee that deals with food and agricultural issues. Not only will you be able to gain legal experience, but you will have the opportunity to understand the policy implications behind government regulations. These internships are also beneficial because you will feel gratified in giving back to your community and will feel the effects firsthand from the policies you help to implement.

Starting a New Food Law Society 101 – A Step by Step Guide

Written by Zoe Grant- J.D. Candidate 2019 (University of Oregon)

Picture1

(Photo from the University of Surrey’s Webpage)

 

A Food Law Society can be a great way to collaborate with other students interested in practicing Food Law and make professional connections. Unfortunately, many law schools do not have any Food oriented organizations readily available to join. No problem! Be a trailblazer! Here are some tips that will be helpful for those interested in starting a new Food Law Society at their law school:

1) Talk to Your Peers – While Food Law may be a niche practice area, interest in the field is growing fast. All of us eat food and most of us love the opportunity to talk about it as well. Food is a common denominator across all of humanity and it is likely that your fellow law students have strong opinions on the topic that they will be willing to voice given a platform. Look for students who recognize the basic necessity of sustainable food systems and the legal frameworks to support them to get the conversation started.

2) Find a Faculty Advisor – Reach out to professors from your law school that have done research relating to Food Law (even if it’s only tangentially related). Chances are they will be interested in working with students who share their academic interests. Ask if they would be willing to support your new Food Law Society in an advisory capacity. They may contribute ideas for future activities or have professional contacts that could be speakers at your next Food Law Society meeting.

3) Throw a Potluck – Potlucks are a fantastic way to bring students together and they can also be stimulating conversation starters. There is no better way to kick off a constructive discussion of Food Policy than by sharing a meal together! Potlucks can be a great backdrop for a first meeting or can be regularly scheduled events.

4) Meet with your Student Bar Association – Your law school’s SBA will likely be a great resource in establishing your new Food Law society. They can tell you what steps are required to be officially recognized and may even have some funds available to support future events your Food Law Society wants to host.

5) Establish a Mentorship Program – This last point is key. Once your Food Law Society has been founded it is important to build mechanisms to ensure membership stays strong, otherwise enthusiasm can quickly diminish. Try pairing interested first year students with 2Ls and 3Ls. A mentorship program within a Food Law Society is a great way to engage 1Ls early on and grow a new generation of leaders to keep you Food Society running for years to come.

Big Data, Big Questions: The 2018 Farm Bill and the Landscape of Data Privacy, Security, and Ownership

Written by Eliza Pan, Summer 2017 intern in the Food Law and Policy Clinic.

 

While “farming” may still evoke pastoral images for many Americans, modern agriculture has become increasingly data-driven in the last decade. Since Monsanto’s approximately $1-billion acquisition of The Climate Corporation in 2013, ag data has generated both significant investment and debate. In 2016, investments in precision agriculture technologies totaled $405 million, even after declining 39% from the previous year.

The rise of big data in agriculture has pushed questions about data privacy, security, and ownership to the forefront of discussion among farmers, commentators, and policymakers. The proliferation of precision agriculture, which ranges from straightforward spot application of pesticides to complex GPS-driven variable application of agricultural inputs, has helped to increase yields and profits for farmers. However, alongside these benefits are serious concerns about the use of sensitive data by agriculture technology providers (ATPs)commodity traders, and even rival farmers.

In response to these growing concerns, an industry coalition led by the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) devised the Privacy and Security Principles for Farm Data in 2014. Thirty-seven organizations have since adopted the thirteen core principles, which govern issues ranging from data ownership to security safeguards. These core principles also form the foundation of the AFBF’s Ag Data Transparency Evaluator (ADTE), which allows ATPs to earn an “Ag Data Transparent” designation by voluntarily submitting their ag data contracts to a third-party evaluation.

The prospective role of the federal government in regulating ag data issues remains to be seen. The 2014 Farm Bill authorized the USDA’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) to prioritize research into agriculture systems and technology, and NIFA has recently begun accepting research proposals related to big data. In addition to supporting research through NIFA, the USDA has the potential to provide greater oversight of ag data privacy, security, and ownership through the 2018 Farm Bill. Confronted with a myriad of murky legal questions and hurdles, ag data stakeholders will soon learn if the federal government intends to offer additional guidance or strengthen its regulations.