U.S. State Bans on Lab-Grown Meats Challenged in Court - Slashdot

U.S. State Bans on Lab-Grown Meats Challenged in Court - Slashdot
Close
binspam
dupe
notthebest
offtopic
slownewsday
stale
stupid
fresh
funny
insightful
interesting
maybe
offtopic
flamebait
troll
redundant
overrated
insightful
interesting
informative
funny
underrated
descriptive
typo
dupe
error
180982374
story
Last June Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said
in a statement
that Texans "have a God-given right to know what's on their plate, and for millions of Texans, it better come from a pasture, not a lab. It's plain cowboy logic that we must safeguard our real, authentic meat industry from synthetic alternatives."
But California company
Wildtype
sells lab-grown salmon — and is suing Texas over its ban on cell-cultivated meat,
the
Austin Chronicle
reported this week
. The company's founder says lab-grown salmon eliminates the mercury, microplastic, and antibiotic contamination commonly found in seafood. And one chef in Austin, Texas says lab-grown salmon is "awesome" and "something new"-- at the only Texas restaurant that was
serving
it last summer:
Just two months after the salmon hit the menu, Texas banned the sale of cell-cultivated meat...
A lawsuit from Wildtype and one other FDA-approved cultivated meat company [argues] it's anti-capitalism and unconstitutional... This law "was not enacted to protect the health and safety of Texas consumers — indeed, it allows the continued distribution of cultivated meat to consumers so long as it is not sold. Instead, SB 261 was enacted to stifle the growth of the cultivated meat industry to protect Texas' conventional agricultural industry from innovative competition that is exclusively based outside of Texas...." [according to the lawsuit]. It was filed in September, immediately after the ban took effect, and cell-cultivated companies are awaiting judgment.
That Texas ban would last two years,
notes
U.S. News and World Reports
, adding that
Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Nebraska have also passed bans, some temporary "on the manufacturing, sale or distribution of cell-cultured meat." Meanwhile, a new five-year moratorium on lab-grown meat was signed this week by the governor of South Dakota "after rejecting a permanent ban last month,"
reports
South Dakota Searchlight
The
new law
bars the sale, manufacture or distribution of "cell-cultured protein" products from July 1 this year through June 30, 2031. Violations are
punishable by up to
30 days in jail, a fine of up to $500, or both.
"But supporters of lab-grown meat are not going down without a fight,"
adds
U.S. News and World Reports
, with another lawsuit also filed challenging a ban in Florida:
When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the ban in Florida, he
described it as
"fighting back against the global elite's plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals." He added that his administration "will save our beef."
You may like to read:
Meta Plans Sweeping Layoffs As AI Costs Mount
CDC Changes Webpage To Say Vaccines May Cause Autism, Revising Prior Language
US Formally Withdraws From WHO
Ultra-Processed Foods Should Be Treated More Like Cigarettes Than Food, Study Says
CDC Data Confirms US is 2 Months Away From Losing Measles Elimination Status
Scientists Warn US Will Lose a Generation of Talent
AI's Productivity Boost? Just 16 Minutes Per Week, Claims Study
This discussion has been archived.

No new comments can be posted.
U.S. State Bans on Lab-Grown Meats Challenged in Court
More
U.S. State Bans on Lab-Grown Meats Challenged in Court
Comments Filter:
All
Insightful
Informative
Interesting
Funny
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The free market party
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Valgrus Thunderaxe
( 8769977 )
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @10:38AM (
#66041092
will save you from yourself.
Share
Re:The free market party
Score:
, Insightful)
by
MightyMartian
( 840721 )
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @10:41AM (
#66041098
Journal
The Land of the Free is really becoming the Land of the Constrained. Pretty soon it will also be the Land of the Non-voter.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
Pretty soon it will also be the Land of the Non-voter.
TBF in a very real way it already is
Re:
Score:
by
PPH
( 736903 )
writes:
and for the most part, the people are satisfied with the results
And if not, more bread and circuses will remedy that.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
AHAHAH!!!! Hey, drinkypoo, hear that? You're MAGA now!
Poster, you were well to do this anonymously. You clearly did not know to whom you were responding.
Re:The free market party
Score:
, Insightful)
by
hwstar
( 35834 )
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @11:15AM (
#66041146
Correct. The plan is to disenfranchise anyone without the means to own a passport, a hunting license, or enhanced drivers license. Notice that this is asymmetrical in that other types of identification such as student ID's are not acceptable forms of identification.
This will continue until only the rich and powerful are able to vote, just like it was when you had to own an appreciable amount of property to vote in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
When we reach that point, we will essentially become a one party state. And then as you mentioned the land of the constrained. Social programs will be gutted, and the funds directed to the military, and to controlling dissent in the population. A northern border wall will be built to imprison everyone in the country. Statues of the "leader" will with his right arm and hand outstretched will be placed everywhere. The Internet, radio, and TV will be heavily censored. Guns will be collected under penalty of death. Concentration camps will be established for Transgender and Gay people. To preserve the oligarchy, the country will threaten other countries with nuclear retaliation for trivial things. Project Sundial will be resurrected.
Parent
Share
Re: The free market party
Score:
by
ArmoredDragon
( 3450605 )
writes:
Notice that this is asymmetrical in that other types of identification such as student ID's are not acceptable forms of identification.
I don't know which schools you've attended, but every one I've attended doesn't really do a whole lot to verify whether you're a resident, or much of anything really, because they're not intended for that. All they're intended for is to give you access to school facilities. And none of the ones I've had have an expiration date. They're also not state issued. You may as well argue that your employee ID should be an acceptable form of ID anywhere.
A hunting license is state issued, and often states issue diffe
Re: Social Security # was my Student ID
Score:
by
ArmoredDragon
( 3450605 )
writes:
Citizenship alone isn't sufficient to vote, you need to be a resident where you're voting as well, or at the very least, it needs to be your home of record if you're in the military or overseas.
And again, a student ID doesn't show that. Furthermore, simply providing your social security number isn't proof of citizenship, or proof of anything really.
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
cascadingstylesheet
( 140919 )
writes:
Correct. The plan is to disenfranchise anyone without the means to own a passport, a hunting license, or enhanced drivers license. Notice that this is asymmetrical in that other types of identification such as student ID's are not acceptable forms of identification.

This will continue until only the rich and powerful are able to vote, just like it was when you had to own an appreciable amount of property to vote in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
If you actually believe any of that, then you really are insane. Not just internet "insane", but really and truly detached from reality.
Re:
Score:
by
MightyMartian
( 840721 )
writes:
You don't read the news, do you?
Re:
Score:
by
Mr. Memblers
( 877224 )
writes:
Correct. The plan is to disenfranchise anyone without the means to own a passport, a hunting license, or enhanced drivers license. Notice that this is asymmetrical in that other types of identification such as student ID's are not acceptable forms of identification.
This will continue until only the rich and powerful are able to vote, just like it was when you had to own an appreciable amount of property to vote in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
If you actually believe any of that, then you really are insane. Not just internet "insane", but really and truly detached from reality.
As opposed to the republican conspiracy theories that the election was "stolen"? Or the conspiracy theory that individual voter fraud ever amounted to anything? Sorry, you must be gullible as crap if you think of the proposed measures are anything other than an attempt to have less people voting.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Here's the dirty secret about voter fraud - there aren't actually any mechanisms to detect it. Those that we are supposed to have often get ignored.
Re:
Score:
by
Mr. Memblers
( 877224 )
writes:
Once again, this seems to require a mass conspiracy among poll workers, and even if it were true, it would have to actually amount to anything. The things proposed to address this, like requiring a passport are blatantly obvious in their intent.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
No, it really doesn't. Just a handful of bad actors and general disinterest.
[11alive.com]
That's not a story about a clerical error, it's a story about how the security and verification mechanisms were ignored. That means ballots could have been replaced by the boxload. There would be no way to know. Fulton county has a bad reputation for cheating, and here they are ignoring the only mechanisms to prevent it and calling it a clerical error.
Re:
Score:
by
Mr. Memblers
( 877224 )
writes:
That would be election fraud, that's entirely different than voter fraud. The case you linked isn't about ballots, it's the tabulated printouts. Replacing the printer output isn't enough. If it didn't match what the machine recorded, that's an obvious red flag. The ballots themselves would be recounted if demanded. It's not a realistic concern and is unrelated to the original topic of republicans wanting a new poll tax because they're too unpopular to win an election.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Did you know that at one point we were a one-party state? It was called "The Era of Good Feelings". It didn't last. Factionalism is inevitable, and so the party split. In a totalitarian one-party state, it's also deadly.
Re:The free market party
Score:
, Insightful)
by
rsilvergun
( 571051 )
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @11:17AM (
#66041150
Bullshit. They are saving beef producers from competition.
Not that I particularly want lab grown meat. I'm a vegetarian because I don't particularly like the taste of the meat. Not because of health or saving animals.
I do like to think that a properly advanced civilization wouldn't need to kill intelligent beings to eat. But I mean if it's one thing the last two years have shown me is that we are not a properly advanced civilization... So I can't exactly blame us.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
I do like to think that a properly advanced civilization wouldn't need to kill intelligent beings to eat.
We're eating cows and chickens not dolphins. But really the basis of your comment disregards why people eat the way they do. We do so because we are hungry and like to eat. We have evolved to be omnivores. And there's plenty among us who would eat human meat too (many tribes did to the point where we even have a word for it, cannibalism) if it didn't result in prion disease.
But hey we have met your criteria. We don't *need* to kill intelligent beings to eat. We've managed to distil the few key vitamins that
Re:
Score:
by
magusxxx
( 751600 )
writes:
I think competition has little to do with it. I think it has more to do with the beef industry being given leeway so they can get into the lab grown beef business themselves.
And by "get into" I mean buying up an already established company so there's no research and development involved. Buy your competition before they're competition.
Re:
Score:
by
fahrbot-bot
( 874524 )
writes:
will save you from yourself.
I get that this is about protecting the beef industry, but it's so much hypocrisy from Republicans you'd think Democrats were in charge and the latter is simply advocating healthier choices. Hey Texas, how about just requiring accurate labeling and let consumers choose? Unless you're afraid people will choose lab-over farm- grown.
Fox News goes ballistic whenever a Democrat tries this stuff claiming it's an "attack on consumer choice" so can't wait to hear them slam Republicans on this
... [*crickets*].
Re:
Score:
by
Valgrus Thunderaxe
( 8769977 )
writes:
The thing is nobody is being forced to buy sugary foods at Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts. You can't argue that poverty is at play here because these are not cheap places to eat.
Re:
Score:
by
fahrbot-bot
( 874524 )
writes:
The thing is nobody is being forced to buy sugary foods at Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts. You can't argue that poverty is at play here because these are not cheap places to eat.
Good point, though I don't remember saying anything about poverty. And I imagine that no one was being forced to buy this lab-grown salmon or eat at the (probably not inexpensive) restaurant serving it. Texas is just trying to preserve it market presence.
Re:The free market party
Score:
, Insightful)
by
magusxxx
( 751600 )
writes:
magusxxx_2000@[ ]oo.com ['yah' in gap]
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @06:39PM (
#66041726
Republican thinking:
Conservative Issue = "State's rights!"
Liberal Issue = "Federal Oversight!"
A good example: A Conservative's dog keeps coming into your yard.
Conservative: "You can't make me build a fence on my land!"
Liberal builds a fence on their land.
Conservative: "It blocks my view! You have to tear it down!"
Parent
Share
"Cowboy logic"
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @10:53AM (
#66041114
What the heck does "Cowboy logic" even mean and is it supposed to be conveying something positive here?
If Texans "have a God-given right to know what's on their plate" then just label the food. Simple.
Or do they specifically only want food with "mercury, microplastic, and antibiotic contamination" because cowboys like that shit or something? I guess if it's cowboys then add "lead poisoning" from whatever shot they used?
Share
Re:"Cowboy logic"
Score:
by
ClickOnThis
( 137803 )
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @11:12AM (
#66041136
Journal
What the heck does "Cowboy logic" even mean and is it supposed to be conveying something positive here?
From TFS: "It's plain cowboy logic that we must
safeguard our real, authentic meat industry from synthetic alternatives.
" [emphasis mine] And that tells you everything you need to know.
If Texans "have a God-given right to know what's on their plate" then just label the food. Simple.
This, in spades.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
PPH
( 736903 )
writes:
Truth in labeling laws. If one does NOT want all those microplastics, then one must have some means of differentiating synthetic (uncontaminated) product from that which grazes on the mid-Pacific garbage gyre.
On the other hand, labeling everything as "fish" (or beef) with no distinction will allow us to comply with the Boldt decision by delivering the tribes their allocation of salmon in 55 gallon drums. And quit screwing with all the culverts and hydroelectric dams.
It's a republic
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
The people's elected representatives passed the ban.
I understand the Texas beef lobby is powerful, but our laws get made by convincing people. So get convincing; don't sue.
You can't argue that there's some fundamental civil right being infringed here. The legislature has the power to do this.
Re:
Score:
by
ClickOnThis
( 137803 )
writes:
The people's elected representatives passed the ban.
I understand the Texas beef lobby is powerful, but our laws get made by convincing people. So get convincing; don't sue.
The people's elected representatives can do good things, and silly things.
If they do silly things, there are more ways to address it than trying to
un
convince them of what they did. One of those ways is in court, which is where the synthetic-protein lobby is now. Another is to mount a political campaign to promote candidates for the next election who will repeal the ban.
You can't argue that there's some fundamental civil right being infringed here. The legislature has the power to do this.
There are more arguments to make in court besides a violation of civil rights. And the legislature may --
or may not
-- have the power to d
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
You left out public interest campaigns that seek to shift public opinion and thus pressure representatives to make similar moves.
Re:
Score:
by
ClickOnThis
( 137803 )
writes:
Good point. Thanks for the improvement.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
You are welcome.
Re:
Score:
by
SoftwareArtist
( 1472499 )
writes:
You can't argue that there's some fundamental civil right being infringed here. The legislature has the power to do this.
That's exactly what they're disputing. The constitution takes precedence over state laws, and the constitution says only the federal government can regulate interstate commerce. If the goal of this law is to favor in-state companies over out-of-state ones (and their own statements make it pretty clear that's the goal), then the legislature does
not
have the power to do it.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
If they had just banned out-of-State lab-grown-meat, you'd be entirely right, but since it is a blanket ban that would impact in-State labs as well, it shouldn't fall to that challenge. I've also never heard of Texas salmon, wild caught or farmed. On one hand, that makes Texas look a little silly for protecting an industry it doesn't have, but may also benefit them in court since they can then say, "it clearly isn't about protecting a State industry from other States, it's about health and safety. That's
Re: It's a republic
Score:
by
SuperDre
( 982372 )
writes:
Putting the law in place wasn't done by convincing one with words, it was done by paying someone to see it their way, to protect their interest, not the interest of the actual people living in that state. It's already proven lab grown meat is much safer and MUCH less polluting, and it doesn't involve slaughtering/abusing billions of animals, and a necessity for being able to feed our ever growing population.
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Well, a lot of people in that State have a vested interest in the meat packing industry. Just because some of them are also rich doesn't mean the people of the State don't have an interest in cattle ranching.
They know their interests better than you do. They voted accordingly.
Who doesn't want this?
Score:
by
Baron_Yam
( 643147 )
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @11:23AM (
#66041156
Isn't it the desired outcome? The rich sociopaths rile up the ignorant to help the rich sociopaths maintain control and prevent other rich sociopaths from horning in on their business.
We've seen the elections, this is what the public in those states voted for: "Rule me with an iron fist, daddy!"
Share
If Toby Seba's prediction pans out
Score:
, Interesting)
by
Clouseau2
( 1215588 )
writes:
on Saturday March 14, 2026 @12:25PM (
#66041238
He predicted in 2024 that by 2035 large scale raising of animals is going to go away. Small & medium boutique operations will remain for those wanting to enjoy eating meat at luxury prices.
Lab grown meat is already at parity with the cost of a regular burger patty. If they can get it down to 1/2 or even 1/3 we'll see if those bans hold up.
The Strait of Hormuz is currently closed indefinitely and it's not just oil and natural gas which flows through there but a significant percentage of inputs for farms. If these labs are less affected by these skyrocketing prices they may not even need to make the process more efficient.
Beef prices are currently high because the number of cattle is low. One reason is Texas may not be able to supply enough water to supply homes, datacenters, ranches AND growing animal feed. Most food in the USA is grown to feed animals. "To raise a steer takes enough water to float a destroyer."
California is finally out of drought but California has long-term water issues as well. Central Valley farmers are draining ground water at such a fast rate that land is sinking and threatening the California Aqueduct, which farms, businesses and 27 million people depend on.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
Lab grown meat is already at parity with the cost of a regular burger patty.
No it's not. Lab grown meat while it has dropped in cost by more than 99.99% over the past decade still costs 2-3x the amount of regular meat.
But focusing on the burger patty is really yadda yaddaing the whole meat industry away. Lab grown meat still has a texture problem. It may have no problem replacing burger patties, pate, sausages, or other ultra processed meat, but it has a long LONG LOOOOOOONG way to go before it's going to replace a nice ribeye or tenderloin. Two companies came close 2 years ago. On
Re:
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Wait, now sausages are "ultra processed"? That term needs to go away.
Lessons on economics
Score:
by
gurps_npc
( 621217 )
writes:
1) Plutocracy = rich rule (Out competed by all below)
2) Mercantilism = Balance of trade, controlled by Tariffs. (Out competed by Capitalism)
3) Capitalism = Free market (no government control except for areas where non-market forces affect the market: law enforcement, military,
...)
4) Communism = Government controls ALL markets and owns everything (out competed by Capitalism and Mercantilism)
5) Socialism = Unclear word. Originally meaning communism plus private ownership of non-economics assets but co-opte
It's bacon and ozempic kind of summer
Score:
by
deep_space_pine
( 10503110 )
writes:
...with illegal weed, corporate healthcare, rampant guns, and fireworks. Get yer logic loving science shit outta here. Yeehaw cowboy!
Oh, does Texas have Salmon?
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
Do they swim up the Rio Grande every year to spawn?
No? Hmm.
Related Links
Top of the:
day
week
month
317
comments
CDC Changes Webpage To Say Vaccines May Cause Autism, Revising Prior Language
307
comments
US Formally Withdraws From WHO
299
comments
Ultra-Processed Foods Should Be Treated More Like Cigarettes Than Food, Study Says
297
comments
CDC Data Confirms US is 2 Months Away From Losing Measles Elimination Status
273
comments
Scientists Warn US Will Lose a Generation of Talent
next
AI's Productivity Boost? Just 16 Minutes Per Week, Claims Study
93
comments
previous
Meta Plans Sweeping Layoffs As AI Costs Mount
49
comments
Slashdot Top Deals
Hackers are just a migratory lifeform with a tropism for computers.
Close
Working...