California held responsible for elevated egg prices under Trump Administration

California held responsible for elevated egg prices under Trump Administration

In July 2025, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit against California, challenging Proposition 12 and other animal welfare laws in the state. The lawsuit claims these laws violate the federal Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA) of 1970 and have contributed to nationwide egg price increases.

Prop 12, enacted by California voters in 2018, mandates minimum space requirements for certain farm animals, including laying hens, to prevent animal cruelty. It effectively requires cage-free housing for hens producing eggs sold in California.

The DOJ's argument is that California's laws interfere with the federal statute that exclusively governs egg standards and inspections. The DOJ claims Prop 12 imposes different or additional labeling or quality standards on eggs by regulating the conditions of hens, which they argue conflicts with federal preemption rules under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit also argues that California’s regulatory approach drives up costs for eggs not only in California but nationwide, though evidence specifically linking Prop 12 to national price increases is not definitive. The ongoing bird flu outbreak is also a major factor influencing egg price volatility nationwide, complicating the attribution to Prop 12 alone.

Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins stated the lawsuit aims to reduce regulatory burdens that increase consumer prices. They contend that California's animal welfare standards, driven by activist views rather than scientific food safety or welfare standards, have resulted in higher egg costs for consumers.

A Purdue University analysis from 2023 estimated Prop 12 raised egg prices in California by 25 to 73 cents per dozen but did not determine impacts beyond California. The ongoing bird flu outbreak is another contributing factor to egg price volatility.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has dismissed the lawsuit as politically motivated, and as of mid-2025, no court date has been set. Previous legal challenges to Prop 12 and related laws reached the Supreme Court, which upheld California’s right to enact such measures, suggesting states can impose animal welfare requirements even if they affect interstate commerce. However, the DOJ’s current suit focuses more narrowly on the claimed conflict between state welfare rules and federal inspection and labeling law.

The case is ongoing, and the legal question centers on federal vs. state authority over egg production standards. This situation reflects a complex intersection between federal regulatory preemption, state animal welfare policies, and market effects on egg prices.

Meanwhile, several retailers have imposed purchasing limits due to egg shortages caused by the bird flu outbreak. The Center for the Environment and Welfare (CEW) is applauding the Trump administration's effort to nullify California regulations, while the Humane World for Animals and Humane World Action Fund have issued statements opposing the DOJ's lawsuit.

The current situation highlights the ongoing debate between animal welfare advocates and agricultural industries regarding the balance between ethical treatment of farm animals and the economic impact on consumers. The outcome of the DOJ's lawsuit against California could set a precedent for future conflicts between federal and state regulations in the agricultural sector.

References: 1. NPR 2. The Hill 3. Reuters 4. Supreme Court Decision 5. Supremacy Clause

1. The ongoing lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in July 2025 challenges California's Proposition 12 and other animal welfare laws.
2. Proposition 12, passed in 2018, mandates minimum space requirements for certain farm animals, including laying hens.
3. The lawsuit claims these California laws violate the federal Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA) of 1970 and have contributed to nationwide egg price increases.
4. The DOJ argues that California's laws interfere with the federal statute that exclusively governs egg standards and inspections.
5. The DOJ contends that Prop 12 imposes different or additional labeling or quality standards on eggs, which conflicts with federal preemption rules.
6. The lawsuit argues that California’s regulatory approach drives up costs for eggs not only in California but nationwide.
7. Evidence specifically linking Prop 12 to national price increases is not definitive, with the ongoing bird flu outbreak being another contributing factor to egg price volatility.
8. Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins stated the lawsuit aims to reduce regulatory burdens that increase consumer prices.
9. California Governor Gavin Newsom has dismissed the lawsuit as politically motivated, and as of mid-2025, no court date has been set.
10. Previous legal challenges to Prop 12 reached the Supreme Court, which upheld California's right to enact such measures, suggesting states can impose animal welfare requirements even if they affect interstate commerce.
11. The current situation reflects a complex intersection between federal regulatory preemption, state animal welfare policies, and market effects on egg prices.
12. Several retailers have imposed purchasing limits due to egg shortages caused by the bird flu outbreak.
13. The Center for the Environment and Welfare (CEW) is applauding the Trump administration's effort to nullify California regulations, while the Humane World for Animals and Humane World Action Fund have issued statements opposing the DOJ's lawsuit.
14. The outcome of the DOJ's lawsuit against California could set a precedent for future conflicts between federal and state regulations in the agricultural sector.
15. The legal question centers on federal vs. state authority over egg production standards.
16. The situation echoes the ongoing debate between animal welfare advocates and agricultural industries regarding the balance between ethical treatment of farm animals and the economic impact on consumers.
17. References include sources from NPR, The Hill, Reuters, Supreme Court Decision, and the Supremacy Clause.

Read also: