The quote from the article cuts off at a point that leads to a misleading conclusion. SCOTUS ruled 9-0, but not on the validity of the marketing order. Rather, the Court ruled that the farmers can challenge the USDA’s proposed fine in federal district court, and do not have to first pay the fine and then challenge it in the Court of Claims. The validity of the program is still being litigated.
“The validity of the program is still being litigated.”
If Congress was doing its job it would be eliminating these economy stifling outdated laws and defunding the agencies that administer them.
Every law passed should have a sunset provision forcing Congress to revisit it every 3-5 years.
Thank you for your explanation in post 9.