The case concerns a 1937 law that requires raisin processors to surrender a substantial portion of their annual crop to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in order to stabilize the price of raisins. The Hornes, the California farmers involved in the suit, contend that as raisin producers, not processors, they are not subject to this set-aside program. The USDA disagreed, and when the Hornes failed to turn over 47 percent of their crop, the USDA ordered them to pay $438,844 in civil penalties. In response, the farmers argued that the set-aside program amounts to a “taking” of their private property without just compensation. The Ninth Circuit ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the farmers’ takings claim and today the high court found in favor of the farmer.
Yet another example of the tangle of regulations that stifle free enterprise and small business. More on the specifics of the case can be found HERE, and more about the craziness of out of control federal regulations on small business can be viewed HERE.