JURIST - Paper Chase: Supreme Court grants raisin takings case

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] granted two cases [order list, PDF] on Tuesday. In Horne v. Department of Agriculture [docket; cert. petition, PDF] the court will hear its second case of the term on the Fifth Amendment [text] takings clause. The court will consider whether a party can raise the takings clause as a defense when charged by the government to transfer funds, rather than raising the claim after already complying with the government's mandate. The court will also determine if the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] properly waived jurisdiction [opinion] on the issue when they ruled that the US Court of Federal Claims [official website] should have jurisdiction. A group of vineyards in California evaded a US Department of Agriculture [official website] regulation that a certain percentage of raisin crops be kept off the market in a reserve by selling the raisins directly rather than sending them to processors to sell. The Department of Agriculture's regulation limited processors rather than producers, for the purpose of keeping market prices regulated. The vineyard owners were then fined $483,844. The court also heard Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States [JURIST report] earlier this term, also on the takings clause.

The Supreme Court also granted certiorari in Sebelius v. Cloer [docket; cert. petition, PDF]. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit [official website] ruled [opinion] that Melissa Cloer, who filed a claim against the federal government that was ultimately ruled untimely, could recover her attorney's fees if the claim is found to have merit. The US Department of Health and Human Services [official website] appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.