Since VPIRG and the Center for Food Safety (CFS) filed our motion to intervene last month we have seen a lot of action in the case to defend Vermont’s GMO labeling law. In response to VPIRG and CFS’s motion to intervene the state of Vermont has said that they do not oppose VPIRG’s intervention in the case, and would support limited intervention by VPIRG and CFS. The Grocery Manufactures Association (GMA) and other plaintiffs responded by filing a motion opposing intervention by VPIRG and CFS, instead calling on the court to allow participation in a more limited role as “amicus curiae” or “friends of the court”. The court is likely to rule on the motions within the next couple months. The motions can be found below for anyone who would like to read the full filings.
In turn VPIRG and CFS have filed a motion in response defending our position, and calling on the court to allow us to enter in to the case as intervenors. You can read VPIRG and CFS’s response blow.
This was not the only news coming out of this important case. Earlier this month the Attorney General filed a motion to dismiss the GMA suit entirely. In a press release the Attorney General’s office described the content of their motion.
“Attorney General William H. Sorrell asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont today to dismiss the lawsuit brought by food manufacturer trade associations to invalidate Act 120, Vermont’s law requiring the labeling of genetically engineered (“GE”) food. The State’s motion makes the case that Vermont’s labeling law withstands all five challenges to its constitutionality made by Plaintiffs and that the Court should dismiss the suit without requiring the State to answer the Complaint or engage in further litigation,” said Attorney General Sorrell. “While the Plaintiffs prefer not to disclose that their products are made with genetic engineering, over 90% of the general public supports labeling genetically engineered foods,” he added.