South Dakota Amendment E Ruled Unconstitutional -- Is There a Future for Legislative Involvement in Shaping the Structure of Agriculture?

In South Dakota Farm Bureau, Inc. v. Hazeltine, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota's decision and ruled the South Dakota anti-corporate farming law unconstitutional on dormant Commerce Clause grounds. ... Section 21 states, "no corporation or syndicate may acquire, or otherwise obtain an interest, whether legal, beneficial, or otherwise, in any real estate used for farming in this state, or engage in farming. ... Undoubtedly, Amendment E impacts interstate commerce because it restricts nonfamily, corporate ownership and operation of farms, ranches and other livestock production facilities. ... The court reasoned the statute was indifferent to livestock sales occurring outside Missouri and had no chilling effect on interstate commerce because packers could easily purchase livestock other than in Missouri to avoid the Missouri provision. ... The court's willingness to ignore it's prior opinion, in Hampton Feedlot, et al. v. Nixon, and not evaluate the actual language of Amendment E on dormant Commerce Clause grounds poses difficulty for other states defending against either current or future challenges to anti-corporate farming laws.