Supreme Court to hear California raisin growers' case

[pinto]

2. Unsure of the specifics here, so I'm on the fence. Yet many USDA / New Deal agricultural programs

are outmoded. There's a whole array of items that were used at the time to support growers that don't fit today's realities.

The lawsuit about constitutionality is frivilous though, imo. Will be interesting to see how SCOTUS rules.

Another snip from the article adds some more info -

Believing the scheme to be outdated and unfair, the Hornes joined with several other growers to evade the system and sell their raisins independently. They were hit with an order to pay a $483,843 civil fine.

They sued, but lost in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The judges said the Hornes should have filed a claim in a special claims court.

Over the objections of the Department of Agriculture, the high court said it would hear the growers' arguments that they were denied "just compensation" as required by the Constitution, making the program an illegal "taking" of private property.

The whole piece is worth a read. There's more here than the headline can cover.