No. 12-123
In the Supreme Court of the United States
M
ARVIN
D.H
ORNE
,
ET AL
.,
PETITIONERS
v.
U
NITED
S
TATES
D
EPARTMENT OF
A
GRICULTURE
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARITO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTHCIRCUIT
BRIEF FOR THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OFTHE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AS
AMICUS CURIAE
IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
R
OBIN
S.C
ONRAD
R
ACHEL
L.B
RAND
S
HELDON
G
ILBERT
N
ATIONAL
C
HAMBER
L
ITIGATION
C
ENTER
1615 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20063 (202) 463-5337
J
OHN
P.E
LWOOD
Counsel of Record
J
EREMY
C.M
ARWELL
V
INSON
&E
LKINS
LLP
2200 Pennsylvania Ave.,NW, Suite 500 WestWashington, DC 20037 (202) 639-6500 jelwood@velaw.com
J.E
RIC
P
ARDUE
V
INSON
&E
LKINS
LLP
1001 Fannin Street,Suite 2500 Houston, TX 77002 Attorneys for Amicus CuriaeChamber of Commerce of the United States of America
(I)
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.....................................IIIINTEREST OF
AMICUS CURIAE
............................1BACKGROUND..........................................................2SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT....................................5 ARGUMENT...............................................................6I.When The Government Directs ThePayment Of Money In An Enforcement Action, A Party Can Raise The TakingsClause As A Defense........................................8 A. The Plurality Opinion In
Apfel
Provides A Sufficient Rule Of DecisionFor This Case..............................................9B. The
Apfel
Plurality’s Rationale AccordsWith The Longstanding Rule That A Party May Challenge The ImpositionOf A Fine At The Time It Is Imposed......13II.Requiring Petitioners To Pay the Fine andPursue A Duplicative Second LawsuitWould Substantially Burden Fifth Amendment Rights........................................21 A. Constitutional Avoidance..........................21B. Administrative Exhaustion.......................22C. Time and Expense Of VindicatingRights........................................................23D. Preclusion..................................................25
IIIII.The Ninth Circuit’s Rule Would Adversely Affect Property Rights In A Wide Range of Circumstances................................................28 A. Property Owners Face Government-Directed “Transfer[s] of Funds” In A Variety of Contexts...................................28B. The Raisin Marketing Order RaisesSignificant Constitutional Concerns........32CONCLUSION..........................................................36
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
B. Administrative Exhaustion for Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners, Horne v. USDA, No. 12-123 (Jan. 16, 2013)
Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners, Horne v. USDA, No. 12-123 (Jan. 16, 2013)
135
Reads
1
Readcasts
2.1K
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
