A Wisconsin judge has refused to rule that Americans have a fundamental right to drink milk from their own cow, or that they have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice.

Circuit Court Judge Patrick Fiedler took that position in a case involving a group of families who boarded their cows on a single farm. He said that, in effect, the farm had become a dairy farm and was therefore subject to state rules governing dairy farms.

“It is clear from their motion to clarify that the plaintiffs still fail to recognize that they are not merely attempting to enforce their ‘right’ to own a cow and board it at a farm,” Judge Fiedler wrote in his decision. “Instead, plaintiffs operate a dairy farm.”

The families had filed suit against the Wisconsin Dept. of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection alleging their Constitutional rights had been violated, a story first reported by World Net Daily.

However, the judge would not rule that the plaintiffs have any Constitutional rights to own a dairy cow, consume milk from their own cow, board a cow at the farm of another farmer, or produce and consume the foods of their choice.

“This court is unwilling to declare that there is a fundamental right to consume the food of one’s choice without first being presented with significantly more developed arguments on both sides of the issue,” the judge wrote.

Steve Ingam, the administrator of Dept. of Agriculture’s division of food safety, said the case is about public safety – because the milk in question is unpasteurized.

“We have a law that prohibits the sale and distribution of unpasteurized milk,” he said. “These farmers have tried to set up a way to get around the law and create a way that they think they own the cow and are consuming the cow’s milk legally.”

But the farmers disagree – and maintain their rights have been violated.

“It’s a case of fundamental rights,” said Elizabeth Gamsky Rich, an attorney representing the group of farmers. “The plaintiffs are maintaining they have a right to own a cow; they have a right to consume the milk from that cow and that these are fundamental Constitutional rights.”

Rich told Fox News Radio they will appeal the judge’s ruling.

“The state of Wisconsin has said, ‘We regulate dairy heavily in this state. We have a statute and that statute governs everyone who owns a dairy farm – and if you own a cow or a sheep or a goat you have a dairy farm under this statute,’” she said.

She said the idea that an American cannot produce or consume foods of their own choosing has generated outrage across the world.

“The Constitution trumps the statutes,” she said. “We have a fundamental right to own a cow. We have a fundamental right to consume the milk from our cow. We have a fundamental right to board that cow at somebody else’s farm pursuant to a private contract that should be free from government interference.”

Ingam scoffed at the interpretation of the judge’s ruling – saying it doesn’t mean the government can regulate whether you buy corn chips at the supermarket. Instead, he said it was a bit of legal hyperbole.

“He wasn’t really ruling on that argument,” he said. “He was ruling originally on whether we had properly interpreted the laws and regulations in Wisconsin.”

Rich said that should her plaintiffs milk their cows and drink the milk, they would be in violation of the court order and could be prosecuted.

But the judge was not convinced. He said if the farmers want to continue to operate their dairy farm, they must do so in a way that “complies with the laws of Wisconsin.”

I would say that this judge is in some way connected to the dairy industry and agricultural industries do not want people growing their own food.

And the FDA wins again..........

Wisonson law is written by MonSanto apparently...... :( I hope everyone is learning how to grow things for themselves because soon enough (it seems) that will be far more important than having a masters in legal thievery. :)

Wisonson law is written by MonSanto apparently...... :( I hope everyone is learning how to grow things for themselves because soon enough (it seems) that will be far more important than having a masters in legal thievery. :)

I concur!

Before long they'll be telling you can't grow your own food either!

Actually they were/are trying, in fact I don't remember which mega agricorp it was but one of them wants consumers to only be able to buy manufactured seeds that will not produce fertile seeds at harvest.

They should have kept the number of cows under the limit to being considered a dairy farm and worked to change the laws.

Monsanto is a monster.

They are driving out all small farmers who want to plant their own plants and all kinds of stuff.

I know, it's getting pretty close these days. The amount of arrogance

of these people is staggering.

The entire problem with that is, when you have a government, and judicial system that has entirely sold itself out, you're not likely to get anywhere that way. Because more often than not, they will win as they hold all the cards. A case like this illustrates as much.

Monsanto is one of the agricorp groups that did that orginally with soybean seeds. And it appears the wisconsin law says that if you have A cow you have a dairy.... I guess they'll just have to keep their cow in their garage :) hehehe

I don't know WS dairy laws, but that could be the case.

There's a lot of truth in that, BIG agriculture has billions. How much does the average person who wants a backyard garden or average farmer have?

I don't know about this story, were the farmers trying to pull something and were selling the milk? Were they going around FDA regulations? Were they trying to sell a product and not pay taxes? This doesn't sound so cut and dry to me.

Its A cow for personal use!

Exactly. Government has NO business regulating things like this. It's really that simple. Besides all that, I don't think there should be all the red tape that exists in ways you mention to start with. It's just a way to control the populace by having it.

I do see your point Aries, it seems from the article that the farmer boarding the cows might have been boarding them for a number of "personal" owners and likely milking them for "the owners" and giving them their milk in exchange for "boarding" fees.... :) therefore lets hope the laws in wisconsin aren't as strict for a city-dweller to keep a cow in their back yard :D

No it isn't, it's many cows (plural). We just don't know the exact number. What if it was 150 cows? "Personal use"?

Better question, why exactly is it our business for? Because big government isn't getting their cut? Because drinking the stuff might actually "gasp" make people healthy?

Unless you wanna support government sticking their nose in every single aspect of our lives (hint: they pretty much do anyway), you ought to be telling them to plain butt out. We are not supposed to be serving them, they are supposed to be serving us. This among many other things flies completely in the face of that.

They have no place in things like this, period. It is a complete abuse of their power.

Not really, if it's 4 families with 3 cows, then I completely agree with you. But if it's 4 families with 150 dairy cows, obviously the 4 families couldn't possibly consume that much milk so they must have the additional dairy cows for SOME reason. If that's the case and they start selling what they don't use, THEN it's a business and they're just trying to get around the rules of the FDA. There are health laws for food distribution for a reason.