Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture Sues Amish Farmer Amos Miller

In a civil lawsuit filed Tuesday by the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, the state’s Department of Agriculture is suing Amos Miller for selling dairy products to members of his private buying club.

The action represents the next step in the government of Pennsylvania’s quest to force Miller into submission to its regulatory control.

“For years, this business has brushed off efforts to bring its commercial farm operation into compliance with the law — as all commercial farms are required to do,” Attorney General Michelle A. Henry said in a statement. “We cannot ignore the illnesses and further potential harm posed by distribution of these unregulated products. We have long had food safety laws in this Commonwealth to protect the public from harm. Pennsylvanians should know what is in the products they and their families are consuming.”

Miller’s products are not sold in grocery stores, but only to members who knowingly purchase them from his farm store or online. According to the lawsuit, Miller’s Organic Farm is “a buyer’s club” and membership is conditioned “on an individual signing a membership contract and paying a one-time fee.”

The lawsuit also alleges that raw milk is linked with gastrointestinal illness, a claim rejected by many Americans, including Miller’s customers.

Pennsylvania State Rep. Dave Zimmerman (R-Lancaster County), who publicly sided with the state against Miller, had previously stated that the state’s actions were not about raw products.

“Mr. Miller’s case is not about the buying and selling of raw products (raw milk, raw eggs, raw meat, etc.) as some have suggested – many farmers throughout the state sell raw products,” Zimmerman said in a Jan. 17 statement. “I can go to a local farm right now to purchase raw products.”

However, certain raw products, such as raw cream and raw butter, are illegal to sell in Pennsylvania, with or without a license. Some farms label those products as pet food as a workaround. Customers purchase a product labelled “pet food” and then later consume it themselves. The Retail Food Facility Safety Act, for example, only applies to “food for human consumption.” Such loopholes present challenges to government agencies attempting to control what food people eat. Once the “pet food” is purchased, individual buyers currently do not face prosecution for consuming “pet food.” Future laws made in Harrisburg could change that reality and make it a crime to eat raw butter.

Miller does not label his food as “pet food.”

Despite Zimmerman’s claim that the issue is not raw milk, the recent lawsuit against Miller states: “Federal and state agencies have documented a long history of the risks to human health associated with the consumption of raw milk and have expressly advised consumers about the dangers of drinking unpasteurized milk.”

The lawsuit further alleges that a Florida woman became sick due to Listeria bacteria “related genetically” to samples from Miller’s Organic Farm. The lawsuit also claims that the Florida woman “died as a result of the illness.”

That allegation – spread widely in recent years – has been shown to be specious. The Florida woman was diagnosed with lymphoma and had reportedly suffered a stroke prior to arriving in the home of a person who allegedly purchased products from Miller.

Miller has not sought licensure with the state and therefore the government deems all his raw milk products to be illegal.

Miller’s customers intentionally seek out his products because they are free from additives, chemicals, and government control. While certain bacteria counts are outlawed by government regulation, thousands of chemical additives are approved by regulatory agencies. One farmer told The Lancaster Patriot that he believes some milk producers add chemicals to the milk to knock down the bacteria count prior to testing.

According to the lawsuit, Miller’s products do “not comply with labeling requirements set forth in the Food Safety Act.”

The lawsuit also alleges that some of Miller’s products tested by state agents were positive for the Listeria monocytogenes bacteria. Listeria bacteria are widespread in the environment, including in water, soil, and plants, and do not pose a serious risk to healthy individuals. Listeria can also be found in pasteurized milk due to post-pasteurization contamination.

The lawsuit contends that Miller has “engaged in the sale of milk, milk products, and dairy products in violation of the Milk Sanitation Law, including Raw Milk Regulations.”

The lawsuit requests numerous things from the Court, including the issuance of an order to prevent Miller from operating his farm store unless he is brought into “full compliance with the Food Code” and a fine of $1,000 for each and every instance “of past or present violations of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.” The lawsuit also asks for “such other general, equitable and/or further relief as the Court deems just and proper.”

There are no consumers of Miller’s products named as plaintiffs in the case and the parties seeking “relief” from harm are the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture (PDA) and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Robert Barnes, Miller’s attorney, called the lawsuit “a disgrace to the rule of law” and “a flagrant violation of Constitutional liberty.” He said it was filled with “false, fraudulent and perjurious statements by corrupt, out of control high ranking officials too often covered for by complicit media.”

“Amos Miller’s food is much healthier, much safer and much better for members, as they make informed consent decisions to choose, than the monopolized, industrialized food of big corporations the PDA is subservient to,” Barnes said in a statement, “and those members have a Constitutional right to get direct farm-to-consumer food they trust as members of a private association. We will respond to the food thieves, farm libelers, and Amish defamers of the PDA in court, and we will bring the truth, unlike the PDA, which feasts on a diet of libelous lies.”