The Supreme Court heard a New Jersey farm’s fight against a $550,000-plus Labor Department bill set by agency officials instead of a jury or a regular court.
Story Snapshot
- The justices heard Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards on Tuesday, November 10.
- The farm says only a real federal court can make it pay that kind of money, not judges who work for the agency.
- The government says Congress gave the Labor Department this power to police a farm worker visa program.
- A ruling is expected by June 2027.
- The farm’s lawyers say more than $320,000 of the bill came from one charge: a meal plan of about $75 a week that was left off the farm’s job paperwork.
What The Supreme Court Is Weighing
On Tuesday, November 10, the Supreme Court heard the case of Sun Valley Orchards, a family farm in Gloucester County, New Jersey. The Labor Department ordered the farm to pay more than $550,000 over worker housing, transport and pay. The farm says the agency had no right to decide that bill itself. It says the case belonged in a federal court, where a judge who does not work for the agency hears both sides.
An agency fined a family farm half a million dollars, then let own employees judge the appeal.
The Department of Labor fined Sun Valley Orchards, a New Jersey farm, over a 2015 inspection of its seasonal worker program.
The only judges available worked inside that agency, until… pic.twitter.com/Iz9rqreIBi
— Localize – Farmers Market (@Localizefoodapp) November 9, 2026
The justices took up two questions. The first is whether the Constitution lets the Labor Department, instead of a federal court, decide cases that seek money from farms in the H-2A program. H-2A is the visa program that lets farms hire foreign workers for the growing season. The second is whether the law Congress wrote even gives the agency that power. A ruling is expected by June 2027.
How A Farm Ended Up Before The Justices
The farm joined the H-2A program for the first time in 2015, after it had trouble hiring local workers. In early 2016, Labor Department officials said the farm had broken the program’s rules. The agency said the farm gave workers unsanitary housing, used unsafe vans with unlicensed drivers, fired workers in the middle of the season and took improper money out of pay for food and drinks. The farm denies the charges. It says the workers who left early quit and were not fired.
The case went before an administrative law judge, a judge who works for the Labor Department. After a four-day hearing, that judge ordered the farm to pay $344,945.80 in back wages and $211,800 in penalties, for a total of $556,745.80. The agency’s own review board, whose members are picked by the Secretary of Labor, upheld the ruling in 2021. In July 2025, a federal appeals court in Philadelphia ruled unanimously that the farm was entitled to have its case decided by a regular federal court. The government then asked the Supreme Court to step in.
The Farm’s Case: A Real Court For Real Money
The farm’s lawyers, from the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm, say a claim for this kind of money belongs in a court with independent judges. They wrote that “there is no precedent or history supporting agency adjudication of such employment-related issues.” They point to a 2024 Supreme Court ruling, SEC v. Jarkesy, which said people facing civil penalties for fraud have a right to a jury trial in federal court.
The farm’s lawyers also say the biggest share of the bill, more than $320,000, came from one charge: that a meal plan of about $75 a week was left off the farm’s job paperwork. The farm says the meal plan was lawful and that no worker was harmed.
The Government’s Case: Congress Gave The Power
The Labor Department’s case is brought by the office of Solicitor General D. John Sauer, the government’s top lawyer at the Supreme Court. The government says the H-2A program is tied to immigration, and that letting a farm hire foreign workers is a privilege the government grants. Under a long line of Supreme Court cases, disputes over “public rights” like these can be decided inside the government without a jury. The government also says Congress gave the agency power to seek “appropriate penalties” to make sure farms keep the promises they make to join the program.
Why It Matters Beyond One Farm
The Labor Department has used its own judges to decide H-2A cases for decades. If the farm wins, the agency could have to bring cases like this one before federal judges, where the farm says it gets a neutral judge and the chance at a jury. If the government wins, these money fights would stay inside the agency that brings the charges.
The case is personal for the owners, brothers Joe and Russell Marino. Their fourth-generation farm closed in 2022, and its lawyers say the fine and the long fight helped push it out of business. “We were presumed guilty from the start,” Joe Marino has said. “I don’t want this to ever, ever happen to another farmer or small business owner or American.”
Sources:
regionalmedianews.com, supremecourt.gov, supreme.justia.com, dol.gov, reuters.com
