The U.S. Supreme Court’s review of Monsanto v. Durnell is not about re-litigating the science of glyphosate. It is about who decides what appears on a federally regulated product label. Our latest analysis examines the oral argument, the legal path before the Court, and why the case could have implications far beyond one herbicide.

“The Court is not being asked to decide whether glyphosate causes cancer. It is being asked who has authority to decide what goes on a federally regulated label.”

Inside the Farm Bill, Section 12006 addresses when state agricultural standards can extend beyond state borders through interstate commerce. The provision does not limit in-state regulation. It clarifies how Congress may protect national food markets from conflicting state-by-state production mandates.

California’s Proposition 12 was presented to voters as an animal confinement measure, but its broader impact has played out through interstate commerce and national food markets. Congress is now debating where state authority ends and national markets begin.

The issue before Congress is straightforward. With laws like Massachusetts Question 3, should one state be able to use its market to control how farmers in other states raise animals?

The American Heart Association's 2026 dietary statement arrives alongside newly updated federal Dietary Guidelines, and the two don't fully agree. What's behind the divergence, and what it means for nutrition policy.

Many policymakers now believe America's children are facing a widespread, systemic health crisis. That belief appears in federal commission reports, congressional testimony and media coverage. Taken at face value, and without context, it has begun driving debate over the farm bill and broader agricultural policy on the conviction that the food system is failing children's health.

The data tell a more complicated story.

The current debate in Congress is not about overriding California’s voters (“China-backed Big Pork wants to override 63% of California voters. Even conservatives are mad,” March 12). It is about Congress exercising the authority expressly assigned to it in the Constitution when state rules reshape interstate commerce.

A dispute over Dietary Guidelines isn’t about hidden conflicts — it’s about an effort to turn transparency into a disqualifier.

The Carver Center has submitted a memorandum to federal Inspectors General clarifying the public record and legal standards surrounding the 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines. Read the full letter.

When a single state’s sales conditions reshape farming decisions nationwide, federalism enters new terrain. The question is whether interstate commerce is governed by Congress or by market power.

A new Carver Center report examines how California’s Proposition 12 turned state authority into national rule without Congressional action.

How pork prices in Hawaii, California, and Utah show what happens when regulation adds distance to the grocery aisle.

Across the country, families are stretching meals thinner and thinner, often sacrificing protein first when budgets run tight.

Affordability is measured by whether families can keep food on the table week after week without falling behind elsewhere. It depends on scale, stability, and the freedom to choose.