The Supreme Court of the United States granted review in two cases this afternoon:
Horne v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, No. 12-123: Whether a party may raise the Takings Clause as a defense to a “direct transfer of funds mandated by the Government,” Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel, 524 U.S. 498, 521 (1998) (plurality), or must instead pay the money and then bring a separate, later claim requesting reimbursement of the money under the Tucker Act in the Court of Federal Claims, and whether the court of appeals has jurisdiction over petitioners’ takings defense where, as “handlers” of raisins under the Raisin Marketing Order, petitioners are statutorily required under 7 U.S.C. § 608c(15) to exhaust all claims and defenses in administrative proceedings before the United States Department of Agriculture, with exclusive jurisdiction for review in federal district court.
Sebelius v. Cloer, No. 12-236: Whether a person whose petition under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is dismissed as untimely may recover from the United States an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.