US judge rejects JBS’s SLAPP suit attempt to dismiss our Net Zero lawsuit against the meat giant
JBS tried to get our case against them about its Net Zero promises thrown out of court, but the judge at the D.C. Superior Court in Washington in the US has just denied its request. Our lawsuit, which alleges that JBS’s Net Zero by 2040 goals and commitment to eliminate illegal Amazon deforestation from its beef supply chains were false and misleading for D.C. consumers, is ongoing.
The world’s largest meat company JBS (turnover $86bn) hit Mighty Earth (turnover $7m) with an Anti-SLAPP Special Motion to Dismiss submission last April which argued that Mighty Earth’s challenged statements on Net Zero and illegal deforestation were inhibiting JBS’s First Amendment rights to speech related to an issue of public interest, i.e. its environmental goals.
‘SLAPP’ suits stand for ‘Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation’, which increasingly are used by powerful corporations to silence or intimidate environmental and public interest groups from taking companies to court on free-speech grounds.
Thankfully, Judge Veronica Sanchez cited strong D.C. case law relevant to the issues raised in our lawsuit and found that JBS’s Net Zero and deforestation statements were representations of fact and constituted ‘commercial speech’ – and so deserved a lower level of protection under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
“We’re really glad the judge has rejected JBS’s frankly frivolous SLAPP suit attempt to silence and shut down our important lawsuit standing up against JBS’s false and misleading Net Zero and deforestation claims,” says Alex Wijeratna, Mighty Earth Senior Director for Investigations and Law.
JBS has until 10 October to appeal Judge Sanchez’s Order. The beef giant earlier filed another attempt at a Motion to Dismiss last June, which could be considered by Judge Sanchez after that.
See Judge Sanchez’s Order to deny JBS’s Anti-SLAPP-based Special Motion to Dismiss against Mighty Earth’s Net Zero lawsuit against JBS at the D.C. Superior Court and the full docket on this court case here.
