The petition of the day is:

12-123

Issue: (1) Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding, contrary to the decisions of five other Circuit Courts of Appeals, that a party may not raise the Takings Clause as a defense to a “direct transfer of funds mandated by the Government,” Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel, but instead must pay the money and then bring a separate, later claim requesting reimbursement of the money under the Tucker Act in the Court of Federal Claims; and (2) whether the Ninth Circuit erred in holding, contrary to a decision of the Federal Circuit, that it lacked jurisdiction over petitioners’ takings defense, even though petitioners, as “handlers” of raisins under the Raisin Marketing Order, are statutorily required under 7 U.S.C. § 608c(15) to exhaust all claims and defenses in administrative proceedings before the United States Department of Agriculture, with exclusive jurisdiction for review in federal district court.

Posted in Horne v. Department of Agriculture, Cases in the Pipeline

Recommended Citation: Ben Cheng, Petition of the day, SCOTUSblog (Nov. 19, 2012, 11:01 PM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/11/petition-of-the-day-372/