21 U.S.C. § 603

Examination of animals prior to slaughter; use of humane methods

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 21 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Examination of animals before slaughtering; diseased animals slaughtered separately and carcasses examined

For the purpose of preventing the use in commerce of meat and meat food products which are adulterated, the Secretary shall cause to be made, by inspectors appointed for that purpose, an examination and inspection of all amenable species before they shall be allowed to enter into any slaughtering, packing, meat-canning, rendering, or similar establishment, in which they are to be slaughtered and the meat and meat food products thereof are to be used in commerce; and all amenable species found on such inspection to show symptoms of disease shall be set apart and slaughtered separately from all other cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines, and when so slaughtered the carcasses of said cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines shall be subject to a careful examination and inspection, all as provided by the rules and regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary, as provided for in this subchapter.

(b) Humane methods of slaughter

For the purpose of preventing the inhumane slaughtering of livestock, the Secretary shall cause to be made, by inspectors appointed for that purpose, an examination and inspection of the method by which amenable species are slaughtered and handled in connection with slaughter in the slaughtering establishments inspected under this chapter. The Secretary may refuse to provide inspection to a new slaughtering establishment or may cause inspection to be temporarily suspended at a slaughtering establishment if the Secretary finds that any cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines have been slaughtered or handled in connection with slaughter at such establishment by any method not in accordance with the Act of August 27, 1958 (72 Stat. 862; 7 U.S.C. 1901–1906) until the establishment furnishes assurances satisfactory to the Secretary that all slaughtering and handling in connection with slaughter of livestock shall be in accordance with such a method.

(Mar. 4, 1907, ch. 2907, title I, § 3, formerly 1st par., 34 Stat. 1260; renumbered § 3 and amended Pub. L. 90–201, §§ 1, 3, 12(a), (b), Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 584, 588, 592; Pub. L. 95–445, § 2, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1069; Pub. L. 109–97, title VII, § 798[(a)](1), Nov. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 2166.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Act of August 27, 1958, referred to in subsec. (b), is Pub. L. 85–765, Aug. 27, 1958, 72 Stat. 862, which is classified generally to chapter 48 (§ 1901 et seq.) of Title 7, Agriculture. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

Sections 1903 and 1905 of Title 7, included within reference to Act of August 27, 1958, were repealed by Pub. L. 95–445, § 5(b), Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1069, effective as set forth in section 7 of Pub. L. 95–445, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note below.

Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 71 of this title.

Amendments

2005—Pub. L. 109–97 substituted “amenable species” for “cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, and other equines” wherever appearing.

1978—Pub. L. 95–445 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and added subsec. (b).

1967—Pub. L. 90–201, §§ 3, 12(a), (b), struck out “interstate or foreign” before “commerce” in two places, substituted “Secretary shall” for “Secretary, at his discretion, may”, and struck out “of Agriculture” after “Secretary”, included horses, mules, and other equines, and horses, mules, or other equines in the list of animals, and substituted “adulterated” for “unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome, or otherwise unfit for human food”, respectively.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2005 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–97 effective the day after 120 days after Nov. 10, 2005, see section 798(b) of Pub. L. 109–97, set out as a note under section 601 of this title.

Effective Date of 1978 Amendment

Pub. L. 95–445, § 7, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1070, provided that: “The provisions of this Act [see Short Title of 1978 Amendment note set out under section 601 of this title] shall become effective one year after the date of enactment [Oct. 10, 1978]. However, such provisions shall not apply to a person, firm, or corporation for such additional period of time, not to exceed eighteen months, as may be determined by the Secretary, if the Secretary, upon application, finds that compliance with the provisions of this Act on its effective date would cause undue hardship on such person, firm, or corporation.”

Effective Date of 1967 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 90–201 effective Dec. 15, 1967, except that with respect to equines (other than horses) and their carcasses and parts thereof, meat, and meat food products thereof, amendment effective upon expiration of sixty days after Dec. 15, 1967, see section 20(b) of Pub. L. 90–201, set out as an Effective Date note under section 601 of this title.

Religious Freedom; Ritual Slaughter

Pub. L. 95–445, § 6, Oct. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 1070, provided that: “Nothing in this Act [see Short Title of 1978 Amendment note set out under section 601 of this title] shall be construed to prohibit, abridge, or in any way hinder the religious freedom of any person or group. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, in order to protect freedom of religion, ritual slaughter and the handling or other preparation of livestock for ritual slaughter are exempted from the terms of this Act. For the purposes of this section the term ‘ritual slaughter’ means slaughter in accordance with section 2(b) of the Act of August 27, 1958 (72 Stat. 862; 7 U.S.C. 1902(b)).”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 29 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case: Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc., 436 U.S. 307 (1978).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc., 436 U.S. 307 (1978). · cites it 2× “§§ 723 , 724 (Federal Metal and Nonmetallic Mine Safety Act); 21 U. S. C. § 603 (inspection of meat and food products).”

Humane Soc. of US v. Johanns, 520 F. Supp. 2d 8 (D.D.C. 2007). · cites it 5× “The provision of the Federal Meat Inspection Act (“FMIA”), 21 U.S.C. § 603 , pertaining to the inspection of horses provides: “For the purpose of preventing the use in commerce of meat and meat food products which are adulterated, the Secretary shall cause to be made, by…”

Levine v. Vilsack, 587 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “at 1069; see also 21 U.S.C. § 603 (a). As a result, if, upon inspection of the slaughtering of those animals, the slaughtering practices were not in accord with those established pursuant to the promulgated regulations, the USDA could suspend mandatory inspection (in effect…”

United States v. Rudolph George Stanko, 491 F.3d 408 (8th Cir. 2007). “1986) (quoting 21 U.S.C. § 603 (a)). By contrast, “the Stockyards Act is a fair trade practices law, and the chief evil at which it was aimed was the monopoly of the packers, enabling them unduly and arbitrarily to injure consumers and suppliers by controlling pricing.”

Nat'l Meat Ass'n v. Brown, 599 F.3d 1093 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “21 U.S.C. § 603 (a). Regulations pursuant to the FMIA require nonambulatory animals to be classified as “U.”

Nat'l Meat Assn. v. Harris, 132 S. Ct. 965 (2012). “See 21 U. S. C. §§ 603 (b), 610(b); supra, at 456-458.”

Bub Davis Packing Co., Inc. v. United States, 443 F. Supp. 589 (W.D. Tex. 1977). · cites it 6× “(a) According to the testimony of Robert Howard and Charlie Rawle, on February 10, 1975, Howard observed two apparently lifeless cows being hoisted from the pens (not from a truck) toward the plant — an apparent violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 603 and 605 as well as 9 C.F.”

Est. of Kriefall Ex Rel. Kriefall v. Sizzler USA Franchise, Inc., 2003 WI App 119 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “As material to this appeal, 21 U.S.C. § 603 (a) governs the inspection of meat and meat food products: *500 For the purpose of preventing the use in commerce of meat and meat food products which are adulterated, the Secretary shall cause to be made, by inspectors appointed for…”

Garcia v. Kashi Co., 43 F. Supp. 3d 1359 (S.D. Fla. 2014). “§ 452 (providing for the inspection of poultry and poultry products to prevent mis-branding and adulteration); and 21 U.S.C. § 603 (providing for the inspection of meat and meat products to prevent misbranding and adulteration); with 21 U.”

Front Range Equine Rescue v. Vilsack, 844 F.3d 1230 (10th Cir. 2017). “21 U.S.C. § 603 (a). Between fiscal years 2006 and 2011, Congress prohibited the use of funds for inspection, thereby preventing commercial equine slaughter.”

Front Range Equine Rescue v. Vilsack, 782 F.3d 565 (10th Cir. 2015). “21 U.S.C. § 603 (a). Accordingly, slaughter facilities wishing to conduct equine slaughter operations must apply for a grant of inspection services from the Food Safety Inspection Service, a branch of the U.”

Petition of the Colonnade Catering Corp. v. United States, 410 F.2d 197 (2d Cir. 1969). “§ 408 (inspection of vessel boiler plates at manufacturer’s plant by Coast Guard) ; 21 U.S.C. § 603 et seq. (inspection of meat and meat products by Secretary of Agriculture) ; 42 U.”

Show all 29 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.