United States and Department of Agriculture v. United Foods, Inc. (533 U.S. 405)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 25, 2001 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 533 U.S. 405 · 121 S. Ct. 2334
- Decided
- June 25, 2001
- Term
- October Term 2000
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice Kennedy
- Issue area
- First Amendment
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
- Constitutional ruling
- Federal law held unconstitutional
Opinion excerpt
Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court. Four Terms ago, in Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc., 521 U. S. 457 (1997), the Court rejected a First Amendment challenge to the constitutionality of a series of agricultural marketing orders that, as part of a larger regulatory marketing scheme, required producers of certain California tree fruit to pay assessments for product advertising. In this case a federal statute mandates assessments on handlers of fresh mushrooms to fund advertising for the product. The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit determined the mandated payments were not part of a more comprehensive statutory program for agricultural marketing, thus dictating a different result than in Glickman. It held the assessment requirement unconstitutional, and we granted certiorari. 531 U. S. 1009 (2000). The statute in question, enacted by Congress in 1990, is the Mushroom Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act, 104 Stat. 3854, 7 U. S. C. § 6101 et seq. The Act authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a Mushroom Council to pursue the statute’s goals. Mushroom producers and importers, as defined by the statute, submit nominations from among their group to the Secretary, who then designates the Council membership. 7 U. S. C. §§ 6104(b) (1)(B), 6102(6), 6102(11). To fund its programs, the Act allows the Council to impose mandatory…
Excerpt of a 19,561-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.