Raw milk – Headed for a Clown Show?
This is your circus, these are your monkeys if you want access to healthy food
Welcome to Raw Milk Mama, a newsletter about food freedom, our food systems, and how to create local food security in our communities. Sign up here for weekly posts, or keep reading…
If you value this content, please consider a paid subscription.
You know that popular saying “Not my circus, not my monkeys?”
Well, if you’re interested in clean, healthy or local food security, this is now your circus and these are, unfortunately, your monkeys.
Let’s see what they’re up to now…
Amos Miller was back in court Tuesday, October 8.
If you’re confused about what he’s in court for and what it all means, you’re not alone.
It IS a confusing case.
But hopefully, this article can help clarify some points.
Miller’s current case is totally unrelated to the case he had several years ago about his meat processing.
That was a case the USDA brought against him and he lost that case BADLY. He signed 3 consent decrees promising that he would comply with every regulation and he paid a large fine.
That case is over for now as long as Miller adheres to ALL the USDA laws and regulations for meat processing and sales.
Now for the current case:
On January 23, 2024, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) brought 4 counts against Miller and his businesses:
Violations of the Milk Sanitation Law and Regulations (Department of Agriculture v. All Defendants)
Violations of the Food Safety Act (Department of Agriculture v. All Defendants)
Violations of the Retail Food Facility Safety Act (Department of Agriculture v. All Defendants)
Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (Attorney General v. All Defendants)
When the PDA and the Attorney General brought these counts against him, they asked the court to grant an injunction against further sales of raw milk because, allegedly, milk from Miller’s farm caused several incidents of illness and the PDA wanted to immediately stop all potentially contaminated milk from leaving his farms.
Initially, which I’ve covered more extensively here, the judge–Thomas Spanaugle–granted that injunction. But then Miller and his attorney asked for that injunction to apply only to “the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.” Miller and his legal team claimed that The PDA did not have any jurisdiction over his farm as long as he sold products only to those outside of PA.
Oddly, Judge Sponaugle granted that small change in the injunction.
This prompted Miller and his team to boldly claim that the judge/court said they were “allowed” to sell raw milk across state lines.
That is not the case. The federal FDA regulation, 21 CFR 1240.61, prohibiting the transport of raw milk for human consumption across state lines remains in effect whether or not the FDA is enforcing it at the moment.
PDA, predictably, appealed Judge Sponaugle’s interpretation that the injunction applied only in the commonwealth.
On April 17, 2024, the PDA filed a stay on the court’s interpretation of the injunction.
There was a hearing on August 7, 2024 with Judge Stacy Wallace that said, in part, the court deemed that the PDA “could not satisfy every requirement for a stay” and the judge denied the Department’s application.
As a footnote on page 7 of the August 26, 2024 opinion, this is in fine print:
“Counsel for the Millers advance the notion that the Millers are already prevented from sales within the Commonwealth and this if the Millers cannot sell to outside of the Commonwealth that their business will certainly not survive. This Court cautions that neither the trial court nor this Court expressly bless interstate sales ...This trial court did not hold that the Millers can sell across state lines. Rather, it simply focused on the Commonwealth’s law and regulations. To that end, the trial Court urges federal agency involvement. But, perhaps, most importantly, the Department did not raise federal law in its application for the stay. In short, this Court, at this juncture, takes no position on whether the Millers violate any federal law.” (emphasis added)
So all that brings us up to speed for the 3-judge panel that heard arguments on October 8.
It was a short, 15-minute hearing. Each party had an opportunity to express their case on whether or not the injunction against raw milk sales applies to out of state sales.
It should be a no-brainer as federal regulations expressly prohibit interstate sales of raw milk. Something that Miller’s attorney seems to get confused about every time he talks about it. (I am not aware of any recording of the hearing being available at this time, but if one becomes available, I’ll do my best to find it and link to it.)
During his turn, Miller’s attorney made what seemed to be disorganized and disjointed arguments including making the wild claim that the FDA ruled that they would not be enforcing their ban on interstate transportation of raw milk across state lines.
If this is true, I have not seen anything to legally verify this.
Were Miller and his attorney poking the FDA bear at the expense of small farmers and consumers across the country? It is not a far stretch to think that they are using an implied gesture of kindness from the FDA in the form of a press release on November 1, 2011. That was the day that a bunch of us (as Miller and his attorney puts it, “raw milk mamas of the world who are just fakes and liars”) notified federal and state authorities that we would be transporting raw milk across state lines. We would share milk and cookies on the Maryland FDA national headquarter’s lawn with our friends, law enforcement, and the FDA. (Here is the full story)
Regardless of Amos’s source for his attorney to make such a seemingly absurd claim, the actual verbiage as mentioned above from the FDA press release on November 1, 2011 is as follows:
“With respect to the interstate sale and distribution of raw milk, the FDA has never taken, nor does it intend to take, enforcement action against an individual who purchased and transported raw milk across state lines solely for his or her own personal consumption.”
The implications in this one small injunction ruling remain large.
If the court determines that the injunction does not hold, that could, perhaps, open the floodgates for other businesses who wish to use the ruling as some sort of loophole.
The PDA brought this up in their arguments in favor of keeping the injunction in place.
Ostensibly, if the court rules that it does not hold, other businesses could decide they, too, do not need to adhere to the basic food safety standards in place for food distributed outside of PA. This is problematic as we don’t have other systems in place that work instead of that.
But here’s the bottom line:
The entire court process so far has been arguing about whether or not the original injunction against Miller keeps him from selling raw milk all across the country. The court has not yet even set a date to hear the ACTUAL 4 counts that the department is bringing against him.
Yes, the ruling we are focused on in this article is important, on so many layers. But it is not a ruling on whether or not Miller can sell raw milk without a permit. Those 4 counts have yet to be heard. And that will certainly be interesting as it unfolds.
For now, we are only waiting to see if the PDA’s injunction holds or doesn’t hold. The federal government has – so far – not gotten involved.
My take on the whole thing – this case is a circus.
Expect to see some clowns. I just can’t see where this case can or will “win” in Miller’s favor. The implications are too large. No matter what this 3-judge panel does as a result of this hearing, it won’t help change raw milk laws on a larger scale. If they rule that the injunction doesn’t hold (which some are hoping for), it will only create more chaos with the FDA and give the federal government more evidence and more incentive to prosecute Miller on the federal level.
And should Miller lose by clowning around, he will most assuredly set an unwelcome precedent that will harm many honest, hard working farmers trying to make a living in a tanking dairy industry.
The solutions remain the same no matter what happens with this case:
Find food sources as locally as possible.
Participate in your own food production on whatever level possible.
Work to change the laws in your region and state to increase and improve access to local, clean and safe food, especially dairy and meats.
And for goodness sake, stop sending millions of dollars to charlatans and fakes who are making the whole situation worse!
I am grateful for all the recent influx of new subscribers. Thank you to all who have upgraded to paid subscriptions recently. Your messages and notes are encouraging and uplifting. You are the reason this work can continue.
Some have asked about making a one-time gift. Yes, you can contribute here. My family thanks you for investing in my writing.
For more content, sign up for daily emails about our food systems or listen to the Nourishing Liberty Podcast.