By Jonathan Stempel
NEW YORK (Reuters) – A federal appeals court on Wednesday declared unconstitutional a New York law that largely banned sales and in-store displays by antiques dealers of ivory and rhinoceros horns in the state.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan sided with two trade groups that said the law signed by former Governor Andrew Cuomo violated antiques dealers’ First Amendment commercial speech rights.
The court called the law broader than necessary to promote New York’s substantial interest in stopping illegal ivory sales in the state, noting that it also covered goods that could be sold legally interstate or internationally.
In a joint opinion, Circuit Judges Pierre Leval and Myrna Perez said forbidding dealers from communicating “crucially important” information to lawful buyers about the quality and authenticity of ivory goods was an “excessive burden” on speech.
Starting in 1973, Congress largely banned ivory sales through the federal Endangered Species Act, but has provided exceptions for goods that were less than 50% ivory.
New York’s law went further, providing exceptions only for goods that were less than 20% ivory, and subjecting violators to fines of $3,000 and larger.
Sponsors said New York’s law was needed because elephant and rhinoceros populations were declining in Africa and Asia, with 96 elephants slaughtered each day.
Ivory comes from elephant tusks. Animal rights groups have estimated the global ivory trade at $23 billion annually.
New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation, which enforces the ivory law, had no immediate comment.
The law had been challenged by the Art and Antique Dealers League of America and the National Antique and Art Dealers Association of America.
Their lawyer Caleb Trotter, of the Pacific Legal Foundation, said the decision showed New York went too far in restricting the marketing of “lawful antiques and works of art.”
Circuit Judge Richard Sullivan dissented from Wednesday’s decision, saying the Endangered Species Act preempted New York’s law altogether. He agreed that the speech restrictions were improper.
The case is Art and Antique Dealers League of America Inc et al v. Seggos et al, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 21-569.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Marguerita Choy)
Comments