Dive Brief:
- The Supreme Court has taken up Horne vs. Department of Agriculture, a case regarding a law that raisin farmers deem to be both outdated and unconstitutional, for a second go-round.
- The Depression-era law requires that the Department of Agriculture regulate the prices of certain crops, including raisins, by controlling the production and admission of products to the market.
- This law forces raisin handlers (not producers or bulk farmers) to turn over a portion of their crop yield each year for varying amounts of compensation or nothing at all.
Dive Insight:
Horne, who devised a strategy to be deemed a "producer" rather than a "handler" of raisins, did not turn over any portion of his 2002-03 or 2003-04 crops and was fined considerably as a result. The Department of Agriculture had required that he submit 47% of his yields the first year — the year, he noted, that many other farmers received less compensation than the amount of production. The second year, the department asked for 30% while reportedly paying other farmers nothing.
Raisin farmers are up in arms about what they officially refer to as the government "taking" their crops, though the case has been bumped from court to court. Now that it's back in the Supreme Court's hands, farmers will be on watch to see what the decision might hold for next year's harvest.