date:Sep 10, 2015
elled speech must itself be controversial.
There is nothing remotely controversial, Sorrells legal team wrote in the brief, about the purely factual statement produced with genetic engineering.
The food groups have argued Act 120 resembles a 1996 decision known as Intl Dairy Foods Assn v. Amestoy. In that case, the Second Circuit examined a Vermont law that required labels for milk that was produced from cows treated with a growth hormone known as recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone or rGBH. The