At Western Growers, we stand firm in our commitment to protecting the rights of the farmers and agribusinesses we represent against burdensome and unconstitutional laws. In recent months, we have engaged in two critical legal battles to push back against legislative overreach: one challenging California’s SB 399, a law restricting employer speech, and another contesting SB 253 and SB 261, which impose costly and impractical climate-related disclosure requirements on businesses.

These cases represent more than just legal disputes— they highlight the growing tension between government regulation and the rights of employers in the agricultural sector and beyond. Here’s where both cases stand today.

Challenging SB 399: Protecting Employers’ Right to Speak

SB 399, also known as the California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act, took effect on Jan. 1, 2025. The law prohibits employers from requiring employees to attend meetings where political or religious matters—including discussions on unionization—are addressed. While supporters claim the law protects workers from coercion, it simultaneously restricts employers’ ability to communicate with their workforce on critical issues that directly impact their businesses and employees’ rights.

Western Growers joined the California Chamber of Commerce and California Restaurant Association in filing a federal lawsuit in the Eastern District of California challenging SB 399 on constitutional grounds. We argue that the law:

• Violates the First Amendment by limiting employers’ ability to speak on political and labor-related matters.
• Is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which explicitly protects an employer’s right to express opinions about unionization as long as there is no threat or coercion.

The legal battle escalated on Feb. 14, 2025, when the association plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to block enforcement of SB 399 while the case is litigated. If granted, the injunction would prevent the state from enforcing the law until the court reaches a final decision on its constitutionality.

This case is critical for maintaining open and transparent workplace discussions, ensuring that employers can provide employees with the information necessary to make informed decisions about their rights and workplace representation.

Opposing SB 253 and SB 261: Addressing Unconstitutional Climate Disclosure Mandates

In a separate legal action, Western Growers has joined forces with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, California Chamber of Commerce and other industry groups to challenge California’s new climate reporting laws—SB 253 and SB 261. These laws mandate extensive greenhouse gas emissions reporting and climate-related financial risk disclosures from companies operating in California with revenues exceeding specific thresholds. Notably, SB 253’s mandated Scope 3 emissions disclosures will have a ripple effect across the entire supply chain, requiring even small and mid-sized farms and agribusinesses to provide emissions data to larger companies that are subject to the law, creating substantial compliance burdens industry-wide.

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the lawsuit contends that SB 253 and SB 261 unconstitutionally compel speech in violation of the First Amendment by forcing companies to disclose information that may be inaccurate or misleading due to the complexities of measuring emissions across extensive supply chains. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue that these laws are precluded by the federal Clean Air Act and violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution by attempting to regulate activities beyond California’s borders, thereby imposing burdens on interstate commerce.

Unfortunately, the Court recently dismissed the challenges to SB 253 on federal preemption and extraterritoriality as not yet ripe to file.

For SB 261, the Court dismissed the federal preemption claim with prejudice, barring it from being refiled, while the interstate commerce claim was dismissed without prejudice, allowing plaintiffs to amend their complaint and reassert the challenge.

While this ruling represents a short-term setback, our legal challenge remains active. The case will continue on First Amendment grounds, with summary judgment motions expected later this year. Additionally, because some claims were dismissed without prejudice, we have an opportunity to amend our complaint and reassert those challenges.

Why These Cases Matter for Agriculture

Both SB 399 and SB 253/SB 261 impose significant and unnecessary burdens on agricultural businesses. SB 399 directly undermines employer free speech rights, while SB 253 and SB 261 create costly, complex compliance obligations that unfairly target businesses operating in California.

Western Growers remains committed to fighting these unconstitutional laws and ensuring that our members are not subjected to government overreach that disrupts their ability to operate efficiently and fairly. We will continue to provide updates as these cases progress, standing firm in our mission to protect the agricultural industry from unjust regulation.