GMO Labeling: California’s Proposition 37 and Federal Constitutional Implications

Abstract

While genetically modified organism (GMO) labeling laws have been proposed on national, state, and local levels, it is probable that California will become the first state to pass a GMO labeling law. California’s Proposition 37, or the Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act, is subject to voter approval on November 6, 2012.1 The proposed act would require food partially or entirely produced with genetic engineering to be conspicuously labeled ““Genetically Engineered” or “Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering.” Any food commodity not so labeled will be deemed misbranded. The law also prohibits genetically modified (GM) foods from being labeled as ““natural” or any close derivative. Similar legislation was proposed in Vermont and Connecticut, but have failed amid headlines such as “GMO Legislation Update: Monsanto Trumps Democracy in Vermont, Connecticut” and “Connecticut Fears Monsanto -- Bill to Label GM Ingredients Dead Due to Law Suit Worries.” Connecticut lawmakers attributed the failure of the proposed legislation to threatened lawsuits by food producers.7 Food manufacturers and GM seed producers, such as Monsanto, that fear labeling will reduce their profits will likely challenge the constitutionality of the proposed act. Allegations will likely include that GMO labeling is preempted by federal law and that it will unduly burden interstate commerce.