USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack announced on June 17 the agency will reconsider the Trump administration’s interpretation that USDA is not authorized to regulate the practices set forth in the 2017 Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices final rule.

The controversial animal-welfare rule was finalized in the Obama administration and quashed in the Trump administration. It included new standards for raising, transporting and slaughtering animals.

“I have directed the National Organic Program to begin a rulemaking to address this statutory interpretation and to include a proposal to disallow the use of porches as outdoor space in organic production over time and on other topics that were the subject of the OLPP final rule,” Vilsack said.

USDA anticipates sending the proposed rule to the Office of Management and Budget within six to nine months from the date of the remand.

The new standards were set to go into effect in March 2017 but were delayed by an executive order by President Donald Trump, putting implementation of all pending regulations on hold.

USDA delayed implementation again in May and November 2017 and withdrew the rule in March 2018, stating it exceeds the agency’s statutory authority and could have a negative effect on voluntary participation in the National Organic Program.

The Organic Trade Association challenged the delays in court in September 2017, amending its complaint twice and challenging the withdrawal of the rule.

In a statement on Friday, the Organic Trade Association said it “welcomes Secretary Vilsack’s acknowledgment that animal welfare belongs in organic, and birds belong outside.”

“The USDA has already conceded that its economic analysis underpinning the Trump withdrawal of the OLPP rule is flawed. We hope that USDA’s acknowledgment of these matters now facilitates a full and timely resolution of this litigation,” the association stated, adding it will proceed with its lawsuit absent a full settlement.

In December, OTA filed a motion to extend the deadlines for summary judgment briefing to permit the incoming administration time to evaluate the case.

The court granted the motion, and OTA and USDA in February sought a 30-day stay to explore the potential for an agreement that would allow a resolution without further litigation.

OTA and USDA on March 22 jointly requested another 30-day extension in the deadline of a joint status report, saying they have conferred on several occasions regarding a potential amicable resolution.

The Center for Food Safety also filed a lawsuit against USDA in March 2018 for its withdrawal of the final rule.

“Reinstating the organic animal welfare rule is a huge victory in securing the trust of consumers and farmers alike who expect meaningful and consistent standards for animal welfare under the organic label,” said Abby Youngblood, executive director of the National Organic Coalition, a plaintiff in that case.

Conventional livestock and poultry groups fiercely opposed the rule, citing health threats to animals and the public. They argued its animal-welfare standards aren’t based on science and are outside the scope of the Organic Food Production Act, which they said regulates only feeding and medication practices.

In addition, some contended the rule would vilify conventionally raised livestock.