Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Corporate Farming Laws

Nebraska District Court Holds Nebraska Corporate
Farming Law Unconstitutional

Harrison M. Pittman
Research Assistant Professor of Law

In Jones v. Gale, 405 F.Supp.2d 1066 (D. Neb. 2005), several farm and ranch owners (hereinafter plaintiffs) brought an action to challenge the constitutionality of the Nebraska corporate farming law, Neb. Const. art. XII, § 8, commonly referred to as “Initiative 300.” The plaintiffs argued that Initiative 300 violated the Commerce Clause, the Privileges and Immunities Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. They also argued that Initiative 300 violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12117. The United States District Court for the District of Nebraska held that Initiative 300, through the “dormant Commerce Clause,” violated the Commerce Clause and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and that it did not violate the Equal Protection Clause or the Privileges and Immunities Clause.

The case was decided on December 15, 2005; this summary was posted Feb. 23, 2006.