The recurring conflict of American capitalism pitting large versus small will once again play out Tuesday. This time in front of the Supreme Court where a global agri-business leader is asking the justices to overturn a lower court ruling in favor of a family-operated farm with environmental sensitivities.
But as is often the case at the Supreme Court, the underlying legal dispute is considerably more pedantic than the broader overtones of the larger conflict.
The issue the justices will have to solve is assessing the authority of a federal trial court judge to issue a sweeping injunction under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Nonetheless, the case offers a glimpse into the ages-old dispute between the competing interests of modernity and environmental stewardship.
Monsanto is one of the world’s largest agriculture companies and has developed a genetically engineered alfalfa variety known as Roundup Ready alfalfa. Monsanto claims its product is simply another in a line of stronger seeds that have “become a mainstay of American agriculture” because of its ability to generate higher yields which means more money in farmers pockets. Its Roundup Ready alfalfa is believed to offer greater resistance to a common herbicide that Monsanto also produces.
Geertson Seed Farm objects to the Monsanto seed believing it will contaminate organically produced alfalfa. The Idaho-based operation contends the Roundup Ready alfalfa will be difficult to kill and then cross-pollinate with other seeds. Geertson says this “will contaminate other feral plants and conventional alfalfa seed fields in the area. In a few years, it will be extremely difficult to avoid contamination from [genetically engineered] alfalfa to conventional alfalfa seed.”
Geertson sued and convinced a federal judge to issue a nationwide injunction preventing Monsanto from selling its alfalfa seed. The judge ruled that certain procedures weren’t followed under NEPA and that Monsanto is prohibited from selling its seed, at the very least, until those protocols are completed.
Monsanto says Geertson’s “science fiction-like scenarios” about the fate of natural alfalfa seeds are bogus. It also objects to the judge’s decision to issue the injunction which Monsanto claims is an “extraordinary remedy” that may be granted only when necessary to prevent likely irreparable harm.”
The justices are almost certain to focus their attention on the legal merits of the injunction and stay away from the back-and-forth over the seed.
The judge who issued the injunction, Charles Breyer, is the brother of Justice Stephen Breyer who has recused himself from the case. That means eight justices will decide the matter and if they split, the ruling of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals–which affirmed the injunction order–will be upheld.
The case is Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms