Baylen Linnekin on Farm Regulations, Government Theft, and the Supreme Court

Earlier this week the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Horne v. USDA. At issue is a New Deal-era regulatory scheme that allows the USDA to require raisin handlers to give a portion of their crop to the government--often without compensation. After attending the oral arguments, Baylen Linnekin weighs in on the likely future of this act of government theft.
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?