Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America, et al. v. Department of Agriculture, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, No. 21-8042 · judgment May 20, 2022


Certiorari denied · March 6, 2023
Pre-decision estimate: 3% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

The Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2 §§ 1 - 16, imposes detailed reporting requirements on federal advisory committees. The Act defines “advisory committee” as including any committee “established” or “utilized” by a federal agency “in the interest of obtaining advice or recommendations for the President or one or more agencies or officers of the Federal Government.” 5 U.S.C. App. 2, § 3(2). In Public Citizen v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 491 U.S. 440 (1989), this Court held that the word “utilized” should not be construed in accordance with its “straightforward” and “literal” meaning but rather should be read narrowly—in part because assigning “utilized” its commonly understood meaning would raise considerable doubt regarding FACA’s constitutionality. 491 U.S. at 465-67. Relying on Public Citizen, the courts below held—in direct conflict with a decision of the Eleventh Circuit—that “established” should also be construed more narrowly than its ordinary meaning would suggest. The Question Presented is: Should the word “established,” as used in FACA, be construed in accord with its “plain” meaning (as the Eleventh Circuit held) or should be it construed more narrowly (as the Tenth Circuit held)?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Richard A. Samp
New Civil Liberties Alliance

For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Linked docket
22A98

Proceedings

  1. Mar 06 2023
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Feb 15 2023
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/3/2023.
  3. Feb 14 2023
    Reply of petitioners Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America, et al. filed. (Distributed)
  4. Jan 27 2023
    Brief of respondents Department of Agriculture, et al. in opposition filed.
  5. Dec 19 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 28, 2022 to January 27, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
  6. Dec 19 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 27, 2023.
  7. Nov 09 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 28, 2022.
  8. Nov 08 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 28, 2022 to December 28, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
  9. Oct 28 2022
    Response Requested. (Due November 28, 2022)
  10. Oct 25 2022
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/10/2022.
  11. Oct 20 2022
    Waiver of right of respondent Department of Agriculture, et al. to respond filed.
  12. Sep 19 2022
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 21, 2022)
  13. Aug 04 2022
    Application (22A98) granted by Justice Gorsuch extending the time to file until September 19, 2022.
  14. Aug 01 2022
    Application (22A98) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 18, 2022 to September 19, 2022, submitted to Justice Gorsuch.