WASHINGTON – Despite claims of commitments to eliminate the use of gestation crates among its company-owned, hog production facilities, Smithfield Foods is facing a lawsuit from the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which claims the company isn’t living up to those commitments.

HSUS filed a lawsuit against the pork giant on Oct. 18, 2021, alleging that it was deceiving consumers about its production practices by using false and misleading marketing about its trade practices, violating Washington DC’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act. Smithfield subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the case, which was denied earlier this week by the District of Columbia Superior Court’s Judge Yvonne Williams, according to the HSUS.

In 2018, Smithfield announced it had eliminated gestation crates from the farms it owned, at a renovation cost of about $360 million. At the time, the company said it had pivoted to a group-housing program. HSUS maintains that the transition was not completed in accordance with the company’s 2007 promise to phase out the crates over the next 10 years.  

In response to the 2021 lawsuit, the company said, “Smithfield is steadfastly committed to the safety, health and comfort of its animals. Contrary to HSUS allegations, Smithfield has been transparent with the public about its implementation of group housing.   As clearly reported in our 2020 Sustainability Impact Report, among many other public communications, we provide group housing for pregnant sows during their 16-week gestation period on our company-owned farms globally. We use individual stalls for breeding to help ensure a sow’s successful conception, a practice supported by multiple scientific studies. We also use individual stalls during farrowing and weaning to protect a sow’s growing litter. We disagree with HSUS’ claims.”

The company has not responded to the latest developments of its motion being dismissed, which is a step closer to the case going to trial.  

According to an Oct. blog post by two representatives of the HSUS, “The court agreed with us that Smithfield’s various statements about eliminating the use of such crates, and about our praise for its earlier promises ‘could mislead a reasonable consumer to believe that [Smithfield] no longer uses [gestation] crates during the breeding process which it admittedly still does.’”