The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the raisin-marketing program unconstitutionally blocked a California grower from selling his crops, and said he should be compensated for the governmental seizure of his property. “The ruling deals a blow to the last of the New Deal-era farm programs that authorize growers to join together to prop up the market prices for their products,” says the Los Angeles Times.
The USDA defended the raisin board and said collective action by growers through so-called marketing orders prevents wide swings in prices. The government said growers such as Marvin Horne, of Fresno, benefit through higher prices overall.
Horne wanted to sell raisins on his own and accused the raisin board of stealing his crop, said the Times. Chief Justice John Roberts, in the majority opinion, said the reserve run by the raisin board “is a clear physical taking. Raisins are transferred from the growers to the government,” said the Times. The case originated in 2004, when Horne was accused of failing to turn over portions of his 2003 and 2004 crops to the reserve. He eventually was fined $685,000 for noncompliance. “The ruling means the Hornes do not have to pay the large fines imposed by the USDA,” said the newspaper.