Institute for Justice says the government shows no history placing the farm's case within the immigration exception
Institute for JusticeCounsel for Sun Valley Orchards; argued by Institute for Justice senior attorney Robert E. Johnson
Arguing for Sun Valley Orchards, Institute for Justice senior attorney Robert E. Johnson told the Supreme Court that the public-rights exception must be applied with close attention to history, and that the government identified no history extending it to the claims and remedies against the farm.
Responding to
The Labor Department may adjudicate H-2A civil penalties and back-wage awards through its own administrative judges because the claims fall within the public-rights categories of immigration and government-granted privileges.
“This Court in Jarkesy made clear that the public rights exception is an atextual exception to Article III that must be applied carefully and with close attention to history. Yet the government here identifies no history extending the immigration adjudication tradition to the types of claims and remedies at issue here.”
Original text
Reporting
Where this statement fits
Supreme Court weighs whether the Labor Department can impose H-2A penalties through its own judges; Sun Valley Orchards says only a federal court can
After investigating Sun Valley Orchards, a New Jersey farm that employed H-2A seasonal workers in 2015, the Labor Department's Wage and Hour Division found violations of program rules on kitchen access, paycheck deductions, the three-fourths employment guarantee, waivers, housing and transportation. A department administrative law judge and the Administrative Review Board ordered the farm to pay $211,800 in civil penalties and $344,945.80 in back wages. The farm, represented by the Institute for Justice, sued, arguing that the department lacked authority to impose money remedies and that its in-house adjudication violated Article III. A district court dismissed the suit. On July 29, 2025, the Third Circuit reversed, holding that the claims involve private rights that must be tried in an Article III court. The Supreme Court granted the government's petition on April 27, 2026, limited to the Article III question and whether 8 U.S.C. 1188(g)(2) authorizes the department to adjudicate monetary remedies, and heard argument on November 10, 2026.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
Official transcript of the November 10, 2026 Supreme Court argument in Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC, No. 25-966. Principal Deputy Solicitor General Sarah M. Harris argued for the Labor Department and Robert E. Johnson of the Institute for Justice argued for the farm. The transcript is marked subject to final review.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Reporting
About this source
Report on the November 10, 2026 Supreme Court argument in Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, with quotations from Sarah Harris, Rob Johnson, and Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, Sotomayor and Chief Justice Roberts, and the penalty and back-wage amounts at issue.
Before the quotation
Johnson opened the respondent's argument after Harris finished her argument for the Labor Department.
After the quotation
Johnson said the government's key case, Oceanic Steam, involved penalties tied to the executive's power over who may cross the border, which he called a far cry from a case about labor issues at a New Jersey farm with foreign and domestic workers.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The Institute for Justice, as the farm's counsel, argues that the claims fall outside the public-rights exception and belonged in an Article III court, and so opposes the Labor Department's use of its own judges to impose the penalties.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseConstitutional Accountability Center says H-2A employers have no vested right to act without Congress's approval
Constitutional Accountability Center
“In creating the H-2A visa program, Congress conferred government benefits on private agricultural employers. As our amicus brief explains, the federal government's power in this sphere is so total that no employer has a vested right to act within it absent Congress's approval.”Read statement
Labor Department tells the Supreme Court that H-2A enforcement fits two public-rights categories
U.S. Department of Labor
“When a federal statutory claim resembles common-law actions and remedies, this Court presumes private rights are at stake and that Article III adjudication is required. But, as Jarkesy reaffirmed, that presumption is overcome when the federal claim fits within historical categories of public rights. Here, two historical public rights categories overlap: immigration and government-granted privileges.”Read statement
New Civil Liberties Alliance says the Labor Department's in-house adjudication is unconstitutional
New Civil Liberties Alliance
“Relocating judicial power from Article III courts to executive departments and agencies, even with Congress's authorization, encounters at least five obstacles. Separately, each would suffice to hold DOL's administrative exercise of judicial power unconstitutional.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Institute for Justice says the government shows no history placing the farm's case within the immigration exception
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/8630-arguing-for-sun-valley-orchards-institute-for-justice
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Institute for Justice says the government shows no history placing the farm's case within the immigration exception". First published: 2026-11-15. Last updated: 2026-11-15. https://disputeindex.com/events/8630-arguing-for-sun-valley-orchards-institute-for-justice