It’s unclear how USDA responded to the lawsuit, but reporting by Insider suggests that the agency conducted an internal review of whether it should continue posting violations related to the Horse Protection Act and the Animal Welfare Act (which regulates the treatment of laboratory animals).
Random sex text chat rooms - Nick neswan with horse animal
USDA itself vaguely alluded to these actions and the lawsuit in a statement it put out on Tuesday.
It reads in part: “The review of APHIS’ website has been ongoing, and the agency is striving to balance the need for transparency with rules protecting individual privacy.
86-234), having been approved by the US Congress unanimously, is signed into law.
1971 On December 15, President Richard Nixon signed the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act into law (P. Note: While the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act aims to protect these animals, it was undermined when Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) attached a controversial rider to the massive Omnibus Appropriations bill in 2004, eliminating the prohibition on killing wild horses.
What was clear from the cease-and-desist order sent to Kelly and other animal massage practitioners in Arizona was that they were providing unwanted competition to licensed vets in the state.
As often happens with state licensing boards—for dentists, cosmetologists, tour guides, and so on—the Arizona Veterinary Medical Examining Board was acting in the best interests of its members, rather than the public, and was using the power of the state government to force competitors out of the market.
In particular, because the inspection reports are posted online and contain the names of the alleged violators, the Mc Gartlands say that USDA has violated the federal Privacy Act, which regulates the dissemination of personal information by federal agencies.
The lawsuit, filed in a federal district court in Fort Worth, Texas, asks the agency to remove any such documents from its website.
"The case provided a perfect example of how many occupational licensing regulations — rather than promote public safety or consumer interests — too often serve only to protect entrenched elites at the expense of innovation, entrepreneurship and job creation," opined the editorial board this weekend.