sandman0921
AH enthusiast
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2014
- Messages
- 418
- Reaction score
- 646
- Location
- Tennessee, USA
- Media
- 2
- Articles
- 11
- Member of
- SCI (Life), RMEF (Life), DU, NWTF, NRA (Patron Life), GOA, DSC (Life), WSF (Life), B&C Club (Sponsor Associate Member), USSA (Associate Member)
- Hunted
- USA (GA, TN, AR, TX, FL, UT, NM, WY, MT, AK, IL, MO, IA); Canada (NWT, BC); Africa (Tanzania)
I hope I am not upstaging Mr. Jackson, but this was very good news indeed....
I just saw this notification from The Hunting Report and John Jackson's Conservation Force. Great news indeed for the New Jersey hunters and taxidermists affected by this total BS law, and another reason that if you can afford to, Mr. Jackson's Conservation Force is a very worthy cause to donate to......
VICTORY in New Jersey Suit to Void Anti-Trophy Law
Written By John J. Jackson III, Conservation Force Chairman & President(posted September 2016)
On June 1, the State of New Jersey enacted a law that banned the possession, import, export, transport, and processing of certain species, including African elephant, leopard, lion and rhino hunting trophies. There are published Cecil Campaign plans to enact similar bans in 22 states before 2020. We knew it had to be stopped as soon as possible.
On July 8, Conservation Force, individual hunters, and taxidermists sued the State to have the law declared void under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The suit was filed in federal court in New Jersey. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the trophy ban. The plaintiffs alleged two claims: (1) the New Jersey law is void under the ESA, which does not allow states to "prohibit what is authorized" by the ESA or US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) regulations, and (2) the New Jersey law deprives plaintiff hunters and taxidermists of a federally protected right or privilege (i.e., permission to import legal trophies).
A few days after the suit was filed, the court ordered the parties to focus on the plaintiffs' first claim. On August 1, the State opposed the plaintiffs' claim and on August 8, the plaintiffs filed a reply to this opposition. The fast-track case issues were fully briefed for the court's decision.The plaintiffs argued that the ESA's plain language preempts (voids) the state law, because there is no exception for federally authorized or permitted imports, exports or possession. And New Jersey actually agreed. On the very first page of the State's opposition, it conceded: "the State recognizes that it would be preempted from enforcing the Act against a person or entity for activities which are explicitly authorized by a permit or exemption granted under the ESA or its regulations." On several additional pages, New Jersey represented it would not enforce the statute against persons with federal permits or ESA exemptions. Of course, one cannot import any of the trophies without a federal import permit.
New Jersey then raised several technical arguments. First, based on its concession that the law would not be enforced against federally authorized activities, the case was not "ripe" because the plaintiffs' issue had essentially been resolved. And second, because some of the New Jersey law's prohibitions do not conflict with the ESA, such as the prohibition on import and possession of an illegal animal trophy, the law cannot be preempted entirely.
The plaintiffs responded to these arguments by distinguishing the cases upon which the State relied. The plaintiffs pointed out significant factual and legal differences that lead to a different outcome with respect to enforcement of this New Jersey law.
The plaintiffs then responded to the "ripeness" argument by demonstrating that "trophy hunters" were the public targets of the law's sponsors, submitting a collection of articles and social media posts evidencing the law's intent. The plaintiffs noted that, until the case was filed and the issue brought before the court, New Jersey had not adopted a narrower version of the law's broad trophy ban. The self-serving statement that the State would now comply with the ESA could not defeat the plaintiffs' legitimate claim.
The plaintiffs responded to the second argument by emphasizing the breadth of the law and the lack of any exception for federally authorized activities. The law cannot be saved because it covers both legal and illegal conduct; that it covers both means it conflicts with the ESA's intent to void state laws that overreach into federal regulation of listed species.
As of this writing, the court has ordered preparation of an order granting judgment to the plaintiffs on their first claim, because the state has conceded it will not enforce the ban against federally permitted trophies. The plaintiffs and the State are negotiating the wording of the order. We will keep you posted on the status of the case, but the bottom line is good news for New Jersey resident hunters and businesses. New Jersey's ban on import, export, transport, possession, and processing of elephant, leopard, lion and rhino parts will not be enforced against federally authorized or permitted trophies. And Conservation Force will continue to monitor the State's compliance and the progress of similar (and similarly illegal) laws in other states. The antis' Cecil Campaign to legislate trophy import bans in 22 states has been stopped at the doorstep. New Jersey is no longer the model intended for other states, and state legislators have been put on notice that the hunting community will not stand for these illegal laws. This makes four successful suits and interventions in federal courts by Conservation Force in the past 11 months. In a fifth case, the suit against Delta was dismissed. We have appealed that dismissal.
I just saw this notification from The Hunting Report and John Jackson's Conservation Force. Great news indeed for the New Jersey hunters and taxidermists affected by this total BS law, and another reason that if you can afford to, Mr. Jackson's Conservation Force is a very worthy cause to donate to......
VICTORY in New Jersey Suit to Void Anti-Trophy Law
Written By John J. Jackson III, Conservation Force Chairman & President(posted September 2016)
On June 1, the State of New Jersey enacted a law that banned the possession, import, export, transport, and processing of certain species, including African elephant, leopard, lion and rhino hunting trophies. There are published Cecil Campaign plans to enact similar bans in 22 states before 2020. We knew it had to be stopped as soon as possible.
On July 8, Conservation Force, individual hunters, and taxidermists sued the State to have the law declared void under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The suit was filed in federal court in New Jersey. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the trophy ban. The plaintiffs alleged two claims: (1) the New Jersey law is void under the ESA, which does not allow states to "prohibit what is authorized" by the ESA or US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) regulations, and (2) the New Jersey law deprives plaintiff hunters and taxidermists of a federally protected right or privilege (i.e., permission to import legal trophies).
A few days after the suit was filed, the court ordered the parties to focus on the plaintiffs' first claim. On August 1, the State opposed the plaintiffs' claim and on August 8, the plaintiffs filed a reply to this opposition. The fast-track case issues were fully briefed for the court's decision.The plaintiffs argued that the ESA's plain language preempts (voids) the state law, because there is no exception for federally authorized or permitted imports, exports or possession. And New Jersey actually agreed. On the very first page of the State's opposition, it conceded: "the State recognizes that it would be preempted from enforcing the Act against a person or entity for activities which are explicitly authorized by a permit or exemption granted under the ESA or its regulations." On several additional pages, New Jersey represented it would not enforce the statute against persons with federal permits or ESA exemptions. Of course, one cannot import any of the trophies without a federal import permit.
New Jersey then raised several technical arguments. First, based on its concession that the law would not be enforced against federally authorized activities, the case was not "ripe" because the plaintiffs' issue had essentially been resolved. And second, because some of the New Jersey law's prohibitions do not conflict with the ESA, such as the prohibition on import and possession of an illegal animal trophy, the law cannot be preempted entirely.
The plaintiffs responded to these arguments by distinguishing the cases upon which the State relied. The plaintiffs pointed out significant factual and legal differences that lead to a different outcome with respect to enforcement of this New Jersey law.
The plaintiffs then responded to the "ripeness" argument by demonstrating that "trophy hunters" were the public targets of the law's sponsors, submitting a collection of articles and social media posts evidencing the law's intent. The plaintiffs noted that, until the case was filed and the issue brought before the court, New Jersey had not adopted a narrower version of the law's broad trophy ban. The self-serving statement that the State would now comply with the ESA could not defeat the plaintiffs' legitimate claim.
The plaintiffs responded to the second argument by emphasizing the breadth of the law and the lack of any exception for federally authorized activities. The law cannot be saved because it covers both legal and illegal conduct; that it covers both means it conflicts with the ESA's intent to void state laws that overreach into federal regulation of listed species.
As of this writing, the court has ordered preparation of an order granting judgment to the plaintiffs on their first claim, because the state has conceded it will not enforce the ban against federally permitted trophies. The plaintiffs and the State are negotiating the wording of the order. We will keep you posted on the status of the case, but the bottom line is good news for New Jersey resident hunters and businesses. New Jersey's ban on import, export, transport, possession, and processing of elephant, leopard, lion and rhino parts will not be enforced against federally authorized or permitted trophies. And Conservation Force will continue to monitor the State's compliance and the progress of similar (and similarly illegal) laws in other states. The antis' Cecil Campaign to legislate trophy import bans in 22 states has been stopped at the doorstep. New Jersey is no longer the model intended for other states, and state legislators have been put on notice that the hunting community will not stand for these illegal laws. This makes four successful suits and interventions in federal courts by Conservation Force in the past 11 months. In a fifth case, the suit against Delta was dismissed. We have appealed that dismissal.
