Horne v. Department of Agriculture (576 U.S. 351)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 22, 2015 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
576 U.S. 351 · 135 S. Ct. 2419
Decided
June 22, 2015
Term
October Term 2014
Vote
8–1
Majority author
Justice Roberts
Issue area
Due Process
Disposition
Reversed
Outcome
Petitioning party won
Ideological direction
Conservative
Constitutional ruling
Federal law held unconstitutional

Opinion excerpt

Chief Justice ROBERTSdelivered the opinion of the Court. Under the United States Department of Agriculture's California Raisin Marketing Order, a percentage of a grower's crop must be physically set aside in certain years for the account of the Government, free of charge. The Government then sells, allocates, or otherwise disposes of the raisins in ways it determines are best suited to maintaining an orderly market. The question is whether the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment bars the Government from imposing such a demand on the growers without just compensation. I The Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate "marketing orders" to help maintain stable markets for particular agricultural products. The marketing order for raisins requires growers in certain years to give a percentage of their crop to the Government, free of charge. The required allocation is determined by the Raisin Administrative Committee, a Government entity composed largely of growers and others in the raisin business appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture. In 2002-2003, this Committee ordered raisin growers to turn over 47 percent of their crop. In 2003-2004, 30 percent. Growers generally ship their raisins to a raisin "handler," who physically separates the raisins due the Government (called "reserve raisins"), pays the growers only for…

Excerpt of a 31,258-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database