

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The French dairy giant, Groupe Danone (Dannon in the U.S.), has announced an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to liquidate its holdings in the largest manufacturer of organic yogurt, Stonyfield, so that its proposed acquisition of WhiteWave Foods can move forward. The original merger deal would have combined the world's largest organic yogurt brand, Stonyfield, with Wallaby, a rapidly growing organic yogurt label, and the nation's largest brand of organic milk, Horizon.
![]() |
In August 2016 The Cornucopia Institute, an organic industry watchdog, formally challenged the acquisition based on forecasting the serious erosion of competition it would have created in the consumer marketplace and the negative economic impact it would have on U.S. organic dairy farmers.
"In our discussions with the DOJ, and dozens of reporters in the financial press who contacted us, the operative question had always been, short of regulators killing the deal, what moves could Danone take to placate our concerns?" said Mark A. Kastel, codirector at The Cornucopia Institute. "We openly questioned whether Danone was interested in WhiteWave because of its role in organic dairy, and the synergy of combining that with their existing holdings in Stonyfield, or if they were more interested in WhiteWave's dominance in the growing, and more profitable, 'plant-based' beverage category. This move seems to have addressed that uncertainty."
"As part of the agreement in principle with the DOJ, we made the strategic decision to divest Stonyfield as it allows us to take a major step towards completing the WhiteWave transition expeditiously," said Emmanuel Faber, Danone's CEO, in a company news release.
WhiteWave brands that Danone is acquiring are the top sellers in their categories. Horizon organic milk controls nearly 25% of the organic milk market, while their Silk brand is a leader in plant-based beverages.
Dairy has long been one of the most commercially successful product categories labeled as organic. In many households organic milk is among the first foods introduced to children. Following fruits and vegetables, organic dairy products are the second largest product segment in the industry. "As such a key part of the organic market, it is vital that competition remains open," said Marie Burcham, the lead Cornucopia researcher on this project.
The Cornucopia Institute made this argument in letters, on August 10 of last year, calling on the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to treat the proposed merger as suspect. Cornucopia also launched a petition drive on their website and organized a letter campaign among U.S. organic dairy farmers, pushing for a full investigation of the proposed merger by federal regulators.
The market for organic dairy already has less competition than other agricultural sectors and is more susceptible to monopolization. "It was important that the authorities looked at the anti-competitive implications of the Danone-WhiteWave deal," said Burcham. "We asked that they consider the organic dairy and organic yogurt markets in particular as different and already more concentrated markets in comparison to Danone's other, non-organic market share."
Burcham, who in addition to her expertise in livestock agriculture is trained as an attorney in environmental law, added, "These are important considerations for determining whether an acquisition violates the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act for anti-competitive and anti-trust reasons."
Danone was already a majority shareholder of Stonyfield, the largest organic yogurt brand worldwide, and owns a 21% stake in the Lifeway organic kefir brand. Adding WhiteWave's Wallaby and Horizon Organic brand yogurts to Danone's existing market share would have allowed the dairy conglomerate to control a sizable slice of the U.S. organic market.
"This merger could have reduced options and raised prices for consumers without any positive impact on the quality of the products they are buying," said Cornucopia's Kastel. "With less competition, big companies commonly underpay independent farmers for their products, undermining the economic viability of small, family-scale farms. The organic community was wise to be very wary of this acquisition."
Kastel went on to explain that the multibillion-dollar acquisition could have seriously eroded wholesale competition in other, less obvious, ways.
![]() |
![]() |
The number two brand of organic milk in the marketplace, Organic Valley, is produced by a member-owned farmer cooperative that has been the longtime raw milk supplier to the Stonyfield yogurt brand. If, after its acquisition, Danone had decided to dump Organic Valley, a Horizon competitor, as a supplier, it could have left only one major purchaser of farm milk in some regions of the U.S., like New England.
Ironically, Organic Valley just launched a 50/50 joint venture with Dean Foods, the largest milk bottler in the United States, to process and market organic milk. Dean is the former parent of WhiteWave and has been without an organic offering since the spin-off of their former branded products division.
Under both Democratic and Republican administrations, antitrust enforcement in the U.S. has been anemic, at best, over the past two decades. However, decisions by the DOJ late in the Obama administration to scrutinize the Staples/Office Depot merger, and major proposed consolidations in the beer and healthcare industries, left organic dairy farmers optimistic that closer scrutiny of the Danone/WhiteWave deal was possible.
"The future trajectory of regulation on antitrust matters during the Trump presidency will likely become clearer going forward as they review deals proposed during the Obama administration and subsequent to Mr. Trump taking office," added Kastel.
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
"Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food," one lawyer said.
As the Trump administration continued its illegal freeze on food assistance, the US Department of Agriculture sent a warning to grocery stores not to provide discounts to the more than 42 million Americans affected.
Several grocery chains and food delivery apps have announced in recent days that they would provide substantial discounts to those whose Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have been delayed. More than 1 in 8 Americans rely on the program, and 39% of them are children.
But on Sunday, Catherine Rampell, a reporter at the Washington Post published an email from the USDA that was sent to grocery stores around the country, telling them they were prohibited from offering special discounts to those at greater risk of food insecurity due to the cuts.
"You must offer eligible foods at the same prices and on the same terms and conditions to SNAP-EBT customers as other customers, except that sales tax cannot be charged on SNAP purchases," the email said. "You cannot treat SNAP-EBT customers differently from any other customer. Offering discounts or services only to SNAP-eligible customers is a SNAP violation unless you have a SNAP equal treatment waiver."
The email referred to SNAP's "Equal Treatment Rule," which prohibits stores from discriminating against SNAP recipients by charging them higher prices or treating them more favorably than other customers by offering them specialized sales or incentives.
Rampell said she was "aware of at least two stores that had offered struggling customers a discount, then withdrew it after receiving this email."
She added that it was "understandable why grocery stores might be scared off" because "a store caught violating the prohibition could be denied the ability to accept SNAP benefits in the future. In low-income areas where the SNAP shutdown will have the biggest impact, getting thrown off SNAP could mean a store is no longer financially viable."
While the rule prohibits special treatment in either direction, legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold argues that it was a "perverted interpretation of a rule that stops grocers from price gouging SNAP recipients... charging them more when they use food stamps."
The government also notably allows retailers to request waivers for programs that incentivize SNAP recipients to purchase healthy food.
Others pointed out that SNAP is currently not paying out to Americans because President Donald Trump is defying multiple federal court rulings issued Friday, requiring him to tap a $6 billion contingency fund to ensure benefit payments go out. Both courts, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have said his administration's refusal to pay out benefits is against the law.
One labor movement lawyer summed up the administration's position on social media: "Can't follow the law when a judge says fund the program, but have to follow the rules exactly when they say don't help poor people afford food."
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy.
After failing to use the government's might to bully Jimmy Kimmel off the air earlier this fall, President Donald Trump is once again threatening to bring the force of law down on comedians for the egregious crime of making fun of him.
This time, his target was NBC late-night host Seth Meyers, whom the president said, in a Truth Social post Saturday, "may be the least talented person to 'perform' live in the history of television."
On Thursday, the comedian hosted a segment mocking Trump's bizarre distaste for the electromagnetic catapults aboard Navy ships, which the president said he may sign an executive order to replace with older (and less efficient) steam-powered ones.
Trump did not take kindly to Meyers' barbs: "On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? - NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!"
It is, of course, not "illegal" for a late-night comedian, or any other news reporter or commentator, for that matter, to be "anti-Trump." But it's not the first time the president has made such a suggestion. Amid the backlash against Kimmel's firing in September, Trump asserted that networks that give him "bad publicity or press" should have their licenses taken away.
"I read someplace that the networks were 97% against me... I mean, they’re getting a license, I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” Trump said. "All they do is hit Trump. They’re licensed. They’re not allowed to do that.”
His FCC director, Brendan Carr, used a similar logic to justify his pressure campaign to get Kimmel booted by ABC, which he said could be punished for airing what he determined was "distorted” content.
Before Kimmel, Carr suggested in April that Comcast may be violating its broadcast licenses after MSNBC declined to air a White House press briefing in which the administration defended its wrongful deportation of Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
"You need to understand that he actually believes it is illegal to criticize him," wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on social media following Trump's tirade against Meyers. "Why? Because Trump believes he—not the people—decides the law. This is why we are in the middle of, not on the verge of, a totalitarian takeover."
"An ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien," said the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.
Immigration agents are using facial recognition software as "definitive" evidence to determine immigration status and is collecting data from US citizens without their consent. In some cases, agents may detain US citizens, including ones who can provide their birth certificates, if the app says they are in the country illegally.
These are a few of the findings from a series of articles published this past week by 404 Media, which has obtained documents and video evidence showing that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents are using a smartphone app in the field during immigration stops, scanning the faces of people on the street to verify their citizenship.
The report found that agents frequently conduct stops that "seem to have little justification beyond the color of someone’s skin... then look up more information on that person, including their identity and potentially their immigration status."
While it is not clear what application the agencies are using, 404 previously reported that ICE is using an app called Mobile Fortify that allows ICE to simply point a camera at a person on the street. The photos are then compared with a bank of more than 200 million images and dozens of government databases to determine info about the person, including their name, date of birth, nationality, and information about their immigration status.
On Friday, 404 published an internal document from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) which stated that "ICE does not provide the opportunity for individuals to decline or consent to the collection and use of biometric data/photograph collection." The document also states that the image of any face that agents scan, including those of US citizens, will be stored for 15 years.
The outlet identified several videos that have been posted to social media of immigration officials using the technology.
In one, taken in Chicago, armed agents in sunglasses and face coverings are shown accosting a pair of Hispanic teenagers on bicycles, asking where they are from. The 16-year-old boy who filmed the encounter said he is "from here"—an American citizen—but that he only has a school ID on him. The officer tells the boy he'll be allowed to leave if he'll "do a facial." The other officer then snaps a photo of him with a phone camera and asks his name.
In another video, also in Chicago, agents are shown surrounding a driver, who declines to show his ID. Without asking, one officer points his phone at the man. "I’m an American citizen, so leave me alone,” the driver says. "Alright, we just got to verify that,” the officer responds.
Even if the people approached in these videos had produced identification proving their citizenship, there's no guarantee that agents would have accepted it, especially if the app gave them information to the contrary.
On Wednesday, ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), told 404 that ICE agents will even trust the app's results over a person's government documents.
“ICE officials have told us that an apparent biometric match by Mobile Fortify is a ‘definitive’ determination of a person’s status and that an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship—including a birth certificate—if the app says the person is an alien,” he said.
This is despite the fact that, as Nathan Freed Wessler, deputy director of the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, told 404, “face recognition technology is notoriously unreliable, frequently generating false matches and resulting in a number of known wrongful arrests across the country."
Thompson said: "ICE using a mobile biometrics app in ways its developers at CBP never intended or tested is a frightening, repugnant, and unconstitutional attack on Americans’ rights and freedoms.”
According to an investigation published in October by ProPublica, more than 170 US citizens have been detained by immigration agents, often in squalid conditions, since President Donald Trump returned to office in January. In many of these cases, these individuals have been detained because agents wrongly claimed the documents proving their citizenship are false.
During a press conference this week, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem denied this reality, stating that "no American citizens have been arrested or detained" as part of Trump's "mass deportation" crusade.
"We focus on those who are here illegally," she said.
But as DHS's internal document explains, facial recognition software is necessary in the first place because "ICE agents do not know an individual's citizenship at the time of the initial encounter."
David Bier, the director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, explains that the use of such technology suggests that ICE's operations are not "highly targeted raids," as it likes to portray, but instead "random fishing expeditions."