Facts of the Case
The defendants were indicted for grazing sheep on the Sierra Forest Reserve without having obtained the permission required by the regulations adopted by the Secretary of Agriculture. They demurred on the ground that the Forest Reserve Act of 1897 was unconstitutional insofar as it delegated to the Secretary of Agriculture power to make rules and regulations, and made a violation thereof a penal offense. Their several demurrers were sustained. The government brought the case here under the clause of the Criminal Appeals Act (March 2, 1907, 34 Stat. 1246, c. 2564) which allows a writ of error where the "decision complained of was based upon the invalidity of the statute."
Conclusions
-
Under the acts establishing forest reservations, their use for grazing or other lawful purposes is subject to rules and regulations established by the Secretary of Agriculture, and, it being impracticable for Congress to provide general regulations, that body acted within its constitutional power in conferring power on the Secretary to establish such rules; the power so conferred being administrative and not legislative, is not an unconstitutional delegation.
Domestic Convictions for Foreign Violations
Engage Volume 17, Issue 1
Note from the Editor: This article discusses the Lacey Act and argues that its incorporation of...
The Recent Controversy Over the Non Delegation Doctrine
Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group Newsletter - Volume 3, Issue 2, Summer 1999
On May 14, 1999, in American Trucking Association v. EPA2 the United States Court of...
