Presidio Social Club in San Francisco County California *** Foi Gras

[schlep.rock]

I live in Multnomah County inside the city or Portland in Oregon.

What basis would the Presidio Social Club have for saying it doesn't need to comply with California's ban on foi gras. Are there any other cases involving businesses on federal lands within a business saying they don't need to obey state rules.

I assume the Presidio Social Club pays state and local taxes.
I know they are using a Fictitous Business Name, it is registered with San Francisco County.
Presumably they have food handler cards.
Presumably they get utilities with San Fransico County Water Power Sewer (http://sfwater.org)
I assume they have a business license if they have a DBA. (How do I confirm this licensing assumption, I couldn't find anything online.)
In Oregon, even sovereigns like indian reservations have to ask the state about where they can and can't place casinos. They also, however, can sell fireworks that are not permitted in the state on their reservations. (Apparently, they swing both ways.)

Can the club selectively comply with and benefit from some local rules and then claim not to be subject to state jurisdiction. Utilities make sense, you need them, but DBAs and licensing are expenses they don't need. Can complying with most of the rules make them subject to complying with all of the rules.

Anyway, they probably consulted an attorney about this before serving foi gras. On what basis would the attorney have told them that they don't have to comply with state laws.

On what basis will California try to force them to comply.
If producing foi gras uses electricty or water can the state shut those services off because they are being used for illegal purposes.

Is there a seperation of powers between criminal and civil authority. National State Parks are police by Park Police (federal cops). If the state really wanted to police the land why aren't state cops doing it. Can California selectively decide when they will or wont enforce rules. Does that leave the door open for prosecutorial discretion/selective prosecution?

How do I analyze the California foi gras ban and federal lands question.

 

[CdwJava]

It appears that the Presidio club is arguing that they are on federal land, and since the foie gras ban is a STATE law, it does not apply to them. From what I have read, the state is aware of this and other restaurants using "creative" ways to avoid the ban. Apparently there is a lack of will and resources to pursue the issue. In case you have not noticed, the state is in serious financial straits. Spending limited law enforcement and regulatory resources to go after an uncommon delicacy seems ... uh ... wasteful.

And, no, the state cannot shut off their water and power.

Why is this an issue for you all the way in Oregon?

 

[tranquility]

My dad grew up on a chicken farm. The stories would hurt your soul. Yet, I love chicken. Go figure.

Quite frankly, I'm glad the state is properly allocating resources here. Silly law from silly legislators to appease silly people who, at the core, prefer animals over people. Personally, I think it wonderful the police place the PC silliness where it belongs.

 

[schlep.rock]

It appears that the Presidio club is arguing that they are on federal land, and since the foie gras ban is a STATE law, it does not apply to them. From what I have read, the state is aware of this and other restaurants using "creative" ways to avoid the ban. Apparently there is a lack of will and resources to pursue the issue. In case you have not noticed, the state is in serious financial straits. Spending limited law enforcement and regulatory resources to go after an uncommon delicacy seems ... uh ... wasteful.

And, no, the state cannot shut off their water and power.

Why is this an issue for you all the way in Oregon?

It isn't a problem for us in Oregon unless they set some kind of precedent restraining state authority in federal lands. BLM and the Forest Service all have land in virtually every state. If they are allowed to disregard state rules then I would assume the federal government is going to need to make a whole bunch of new rules to govern the people on federal lands. I don't care at all about what these people eat, I am concerned with people/businesses who disobey rules because they are on federal real estate.
I did some research and they are a licensed business in California. I am hoping that business licenses are somewhat like drivers licenses. If you want to keep it you must comply with the rules and regulations of the road. And, of course, without a business license it is unlawful to operate a business in the US.

The Park Police patrol federal land, but they are for criminal activities. This appears to be a civil matter. I am wondering who is going to be accountable for the day to day interactions of people on federal lands. If state rules can be violated will the feds need to make a bunch of rules?

Additional:
It is possible I misinterpreted you question about how this affects Oregonians. When I created the posting there was a message in the box prompting me to tell what jurisdiction I was in, so I followed the instruction and wrote it in. It wasn't necessary for this particular question, but is for many that are asked in the forum. I apologize if I inadvertantly widened the scope of the question by adding irrelevant facts. Again, sorry if I mislead the forum by adding unnecessary information.