Int'l Dairy Foods Ass'n v. Amestoy - 92 F.3d 67 (2d Cir. 1996)

Rule:

Irreparable harm is injury for which a monetary award cannot be adequate compensation. The loss of U.S. Const. amend. I freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.

Facts:

In April 1994, defendant-appellee, the State of Vermont, enacted Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 6, § 2754(c), which required that milk products produced from herds given bovine growth hormone be identified as such. Appellant dairy manufacturers filed suit, asserting that the statute was unconstitutional. Appellants’ motion for a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the statute was denied. Appellants sought review of the decision. 

Issue:

Under the circumstances, were the appellant dairy manufacturers entitled to an injunction on First Amendment grounds? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the court reversed and remanded for entry of an appropriate injunction. Appellants amply demonstrated that U.S. Const. amend. I was sufficiently implicated to cause irreparable harm. The statute required them to speak when they would rather not and compelled speech contravened core values under amend. I. Appellants also showed a likelihood of success on the merits. The test for determining whether a government restriction on commercial speech was permissible included an inquiry into whether the government's interest was substantial. Appellee asserted that strong consumer interest and the public's right to know prompted passage of the statute. The court concluded that these interests were insufficient to justify compromising protected constitutional rights.