“We are deeply disappointed in the Court’s decision. Given the two strong decisions supporting our position, from the federal district court and the court of appeals, we had high hopes the Supreme Court would have decided otherwise.
“However, we respect the legal system and the Court’s deliberations in this case, and we reluctantly accept their decision and will move on from here.
“LMA started this effort to give America’s producers greater say over how their checkoff dollars would be spent, and by whom. We hope that message will not be lost with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Cattlemen’s Beef Board and other beef industry leaders. We hope they try and become more inclusive of differing views, and make sure that producers large and small, and from every sector, have a greater voice in checkoff affairs.
“We are certain that many producers will be surprised by the Court’s ruling that the checkoff is government speech, and controlled by the government. This was not the way the program has been, and is now promoted to producers. Given the Court’s acceptance of the government speech argument, we expect greater supervision by the government of the checkoff, and a greater effort by USDA to address the concerns of producers and marketers that led to our initial referendum campaign, and our constitutional challenge.”
“LMA has always supported promotion of U.S. beef, and research. That has not changed with this decision, and we will work to assure that the beef checkoff reflects the best of what the cattle industry, including America’s livestock markets, have to give.
“We started the fight wanting to give producers the right, through a referendum, to say whether they wanted to continue to support the beef checkoff. We remain committed to that idea and hope that the Cattlemen’s Beef Board, and other industry organizations will join together, to seek a change in commodity promotion laws that will allow periodic referendums on these programs.”