Key Takeaways
- The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) has requested a summary judgment to vacate a USDA rule requiring electronic identification (EID) eartags for cattle and bison.
- NCLA argues the mandate is an “unlawful rule” that replaces functional, cost-effective visual tags with expensive electronic alternatives without sufficient justification.
- The legal challenge claims the USDA violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to provide data showing EID tags improve disease tracing over current methods.
- Plaintiffs assert the rule is internally inconsistent, as it mandates EID tags but does not require the electronic readers necessary to utilize their tracking features.
NCLA Challenges Mandate for Electronic Cattle Tags
The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) filed a motion for summary judgment today in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota, seeking to halt a federal mandate on livestock identification. Representing a coalition of ranchers, farmers, and livestock producers in the case R-CALF USA, et al. v. USDA, the New Civil Liberties Alliance argues that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) exceeded their authority in requiring electronic identification (EID) eartags for certain livestock transported across state lines.
The Financial Burden on Producers and NCLA Arguments
According to the filing, the USDA’s 2024 rule replaces long-standing visual-only tags with more expensive electronic versions. The New Civil Liberties Alliance contends that the USDA previously recognized visual tags as effective for disease tracing. The NCLA argues the agency has failed to provide data or reasoning to support the claim that EID tags are significantly better for animal health safety.
“USDA’s EID eartag mandate is a costly solution in search of a nonexistent problem,” said Kara Rollins, Senior Litigation Counsel at New Civil Liberties Alliance. “America’s ranchers and farmers have long used visual-only identification for disease tracing, and this Rule does not change that option. It just makes that process much more expensive.”
Procedural Violations and Claims of Inconsistency
The lawsuit highlights that while the rule mandates EID tags, it does not require producers to purchase or use electronic eartag readers. Consequently, many producers continue to record data manually—the same method used with visual tags—rendering the added expense of the EID hardware moot. The New Civil Liberties Alliance describes this as “arbitrary and capricious” behavior, noting that the agency failed to consider simpler alternatives, such as improving readability standards for existing visual tags.
“The authority behind this regulation is ‘all hat and no cattle,’” stated John Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel at New Civil Liberties Alliance. “The agency has no evidence it will stop, or even help slow, the spread of cattle disease that would support its enormous expense.”
The NCLA is asking the court to vacate the rule, citing violations of the Administrative Procedure Act due to a lack of evidence and internal logical inconsistencies.
