A fur industry group has filed a federal lawsuit against the City and County of San Francisco over its ban on real fur products which took effect January 1. The suit calls the ban "so arbitrary as to be ridiculous," and says it is a violation of the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit was just filed by the London-based International Fur Federation, which seeks to overturn San Francisco's ban, which was passed in 2018. As the California Globe reports, the industry group accused former SF Supervisor Katy Tang of trying to "legislate morality" with the ban, and compared SF's ban to "the radical animal liberation group PETA [who] believe the sale of leather, wool, and other animal products should also be banned."

SF's ban precedes by a few years a statewide ban on the sale and manufacture fur products that Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law last year, which goes into effect on January 1, 2023, as well as a similar Los Angeles city law that takes effect next January.

As the Sacramento Bee reports, the Fur Federation points to San Francisco's own environmental priorities as being contradictory to the promotion of faux fur products — since faux fur tends to made with fossil-fuel-derived plastics.

San Francisco City Attorney spokesman John Coté issued a statement in response to the fur industry's suit saying that the city plans to vigorously defend its fur ban in court, and "San Francisco’s legislative leaders have made it clear that this city does not condone killing millions of animals a year in fur farms to make a fashion statement."

California became the first state to enact a ban on fur when AB44 was signed into law in October, and San Francisco was the first major city to enact such a ban when that ordinance passed two years ago. The same month that California's ban was signed, Macy's and its subsidiary Bloomingdale's announced that they would be ending all fur sales as of 2021.

San Francisco's last dedicated fur retailer, B.B. Hawk, closed its local store in 2018 following the passage of the local ban and relocated to Dallas.

The Haight Street vintage shop owner who was raided by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for selling illegal animal parts claims she had no idea she was in violation of the law.

The CDFW (cool to call it that?) received an anonymous tip that Decades of Fashion was selling clothing items that contained parts of endangered animals. While it is not illegal to own endangered animals furs, skins, et al, it is illegal to sell them.

Decades of Fashion owner Cecily Hansen told the Chronicle's Leah Garchik that she had no idea she was up to anything nefarious, and did so using the following amazing quotes that we have pulled from Garchik's excellent piece:

“I just feel that this is about recycling and honoring.”
“They really criminalized us, when we were not coming from a place of malicious intent.”
"The clothes were there only because I am in the middle of building a house in Petaluma.”
“When I read about that fellow shooting that lion, I cried.”

Spokesman for the CDFW, Andrew Hughan chimed in, “My grandmother gave me a polar bear quilt."

Hansen also added that her father was a probate lawyer and she thus apparently possesses an above average understanding of the law. The vintage store owner insists she had no idea she was trading in illegal leopard fur and thinks the CDFW is making waaaaaaay to big a deal about the whole thing.

It's up to the San Francisco District Attorney's office whether or not to file charges. Hansen wouldn't face any jail time, but she'd be subject to substantial fines.

A Haight Street vintage clothing shop(pe) remains closed today after the California Department of Fish and Wildlife acted on an anonymous tip and discovered illegal animal products on sale.

Decades of Fashion, where you cannot shop today, was raided by a dozen or so agents who looked for and found retail merchandise that contained fur from endangered or threatened animals. "Our primary purpose is to prohibit commercialization of animals, which for some reason may be threatened or endangered," Fish and Wildlife agent Lieutenant James Ober told NBC Bay Area. "Or sometimes it's animals that may have been taken under a sport hunting license. And we don't want them to be something that can be done for profit."

Typical vintage store items that might contain illegal animal parts include belts made from sea turtles or coats fashioned from African lions.

Officials have yet to speak with the store's owner, Cicely Hansen to determine whether or not she knew they were offering illegal ANIMAL PARTS. But J.T. Hansen, Cicely's son, reached out to KQED to protest his innocence, saying, "I had no idea. Neither did my mom."

A 1970 law prohibits the selling of endangered animal parts, but not the ownership of them. Hansen tells KQED he believes that all of the pieces in his mom's store pre-date the law and that game agents are acting like "bullies."

Decades of Fashion will be closed until the Department of Fish and Wildlife gets to the bottom of this fashion fiasco.