Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Arlen Foster v. Department of Agriculture, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 22-2729 · judgment May 12, 2023


GVR'd · July 2, 2024
Pre-decision estimate: 6% cert probability (95% interval 4%–10%)

Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, an Eighth Circuit decision below, and a petition filed soon after the judgment below.

Questions presented

In 2011, Respondent Natural Resources Conservation Service concluded that an 8-inch-deep pool of water in the middle of Petitioner Arlen Foster’s farm is a naturally occurring wetland under 16 U.S.C. § 3822 (Swampbuster). As a result of this certified wetland delineation, in the years the water appears, Foster is unable to drain it to farm that area of his land. Since 2011, Foster has hired experts who have gathered new information about the hydrology of this purported wetland. Based on this new data, Foster requested that Respondent review his previous delineation. Swampbuster provides that a certified delineation “remain[s] valid and in effect . . . until such time as the person affected by the certification requests review of the certification by the Secretary.” 16 U.S.C. § 3822(a)(4). Despite this statutory language, Respondent applied its regulations to deny Foster’s request to review the previous delineation and kept the previous delineation in place. The Eighth Circuit deferred to the agency’s interpretation of Swampbuster under Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837 (1984), and upheld the agency’s denial. The questions presented are:

  1. Whether a statute that provides that a wetlands certification “remain[s] valid and in effect . . . until such time as the person affected by the certification requests review of the certification” requires an agency to treat a certification as invalid and not in effect when a person affected by that certification requests review.

  2. Whether the Court should overrule Chevron.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Jeffrey Wilson McCoy
Pacific Legal Foundation

For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Amicus briefs
2 cert-stage

Proceedings

  1. Aug 05 2024
    Judgment Issued.
  2. Jul 02 2024
    Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U. S. ___ (2024).
  3. Jun 28 2024
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 7/1/2024.
  4. Nov 29 2023
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
  5. Nov 15 2023
    Brief for the Respondents filed.
  6. Oct 11 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 15, 2023.
  7. Oct 10 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 16, 2023 to November 15, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
  8. Sep 14 2023
    Brief amicus curiae of American Farm Bureau Federation filed.
  9. Sep 14 2023
    Brief amici curiae of National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, Inc., et al. filed.
  10. Aug 31 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 16, 2023.
  11. Aug 29 2023
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 14, 2023 to October 16, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
  12. Aug 10 2023
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 14, 2023)