Paramount Land Co. v. California Pistachio Commission

In this appeal we consider whether a statutory scheme compelling California pistachio growers to fund generic advertising through the California Pistachio Commission (“Pistachio Commission”) violates the First Amendment. More specifically, we address whether this generic advertising is “the Government’s own speech and therefore is exempt from First Amendment scrutiny” under the Supreme Court’s analysis in Johanns v. Livestock Marketing Association, 544 U.S. 550, 553 , 125 S.Ct. 2055 , 161 L.Ed.2d 896 (2005).

A group of pistachio growers, Paramount Land Company, L.P., Paramount Orchards Partners VI LLC, WV Acquisition Corporation, and Paramount Farms, Inc., and intervenors William Koch and Donald Quist (collectively “Paramount”), challenge the marketing and promotional activities of the Pistachio Commission. Paramount argues that the annual subsi *1006 dies mandated by the California Pistachio Act of 1980 (the “Pistachio Act”), Cal. Food. & Agrie. Code §§ 69001-69114 , and administered by the Pistachio Commission constitute compelled speech in violation of the First Amendment.

This issue arises in the context of the Pistachio Commission’s appeal of a preliminary injunction…