7 U.S.C. § 1621

Congressional declaration of purpose; use of existing facilities; cooperation with States

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 7 CasesGoogle Scholar

The Congress declares that a sound, efficient, and privately operated system for distributing and marketing agricultural products is essential to a prosperous agriculture and is indispensable to the maintenance of full employment and to the welfare, prosperity, and health of the Nation. It is further declared to be the policy of Congress to promote through research, study, experimentation, and through cooperation among Federal and State agencies, farm organizations, and private industry a scientific approach to the problems of marketing, transportation, and distribution of agricultural products similar to the scientific methods which have been utilized so successfully during the past eighty-four years in connection with the production of agricultural products so that such products capable of being produced in abundance may be marketed in an orderly manner and efficiently distributed. In order to attain these objectives, it is the intent of Congress to provide for (1) continuous research to improve the marketing, handling, storage, processing, transportation, and distribution of agricultural products; (2) cooperation among Federal and State agencies, producers, industry organizations, and others in the development and effectuation of research and marketing programs to improve the distribution processes; (3) an integrated administration of all laws enacted by Congress to aid the distribution of agricultural products through research, market aids and services, and regulatory activities, to the end that marketing methods and facilities may be improved, that distribution costs may be reduced and the price spread between the producer and consumer may be narrowed, that dietary and nutritional standards may be improved, that new and wider markets for American agricultural products may be developed, both in the United States and in other countries, with a view to making it possible for the full production of American farms to be disposed of usefully, economically, profitably, and in an orderly manner. In effectuating the purposes of this chapter, maximum use shall be made of existing research facilities owned or controlled by the Federal Government or by State agricultural experiment stations and of the facilities of the Federal and State extension services. To the maximum extent practicable marketing research work done under this chapter in cooperation with the States shall be done in cooperation with the State agricultural experiment stations; marketing educational and demonstrational work done under this chapter in cooperation with the States shall be done in cooperation with the State agricultural extension service; market information, inspection, regulatory work and other marketing service done under this chapter in cooperation with the State agencies shall be done in cooperation with the State departments of agriculture, and State bureaus and departments of markets.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 24 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1958–2026 · leading case: Spinale v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., 621 F. Supp. 2d 112 (S.D.N.Y. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Spinale v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., 621 F. Supp. 2d 112 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). · cites it 2× “The USDA Inspection Services The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (the “Act”), 7 U.S.C. § 1621 et seq., authorizes the inspection, certification, and identification as to class, quality, quantity and condition of agricultural products when shipped or received in interstate…”

United Source One, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Agric., Food Saf. & Inspection Serv., 865 F.3d 710 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “As explained infra, US1 does not fit the “official establishment” description—US1 is a re-boxing facility that, at its option, is subject to FSIS inspection under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, 7 U.S.C. §§ 1621 et seq., not the FMIA. But it, like an official…”

United States Ex Rel. Sequoia Orange Co. v. Sunland Packing House Co., 912 F. Supp. 1325 (E.D. Cal. 1995). · cites it 3× “The government also argues that the Agricultural Marketing Act (AMA) of 1946, 7 U.S.C. § 1621 , et seq., creates an interest in eliminating divisiveness in the industry.”

Compassion Over Killing v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin., 849 F.3d 849 (9th Cir. 2017). “Plaintiffs maintain that the AMS has the authority to issue their proposed regulations under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (“AMA”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1621 — 39j. The AMS correctly concluded that it lacks the authority to promulgate mandatory labeling requirements for shell…”

Guar. Bank & Trust Co. v. Agrex, Incorporat, 820 F.3d 790 (5th Cir. 2016). “See 7 U.S.C. §§ 1621 , 1631; see generally Law of Secured Transactions Under the UCC ¶ 8.”

Am. Meat Inst. v. United States Dep't of Agric., 968 F. Supp. 2d 38 (D.D.C. 2013). “The Agricultural Marketing Act The legislation underlying the Final Rule was enacted initially in 2002 as an amendment to the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, 7 U.S.C. § 1621 et seq. (the “AMA”). See Pub.”

Coffer v. Stand. Brands, Inc., 226 S.E.2d 534 (N.C. Ct. App. 1976). “The Board has adopted certain federal standards issued under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, 7 U.S.C. § 1621 et seq. (1970). See 2 N.C.”

P. A. M. News Corp. v. Earl L. Butz, Individually & in His Capacity as Sec'y of Agric., 514 F.2d 272 (D.C. Cir. 1975). · cites it 2× “The thrust of its argument is that discovery would have tested whether USDA had in fact sufficiently consulted with state agricultural departments as required by 7 U.S.C. § 1621 (1970) and had in fact considered the submitted comments, under 5 U.”

Indep. Meat Packers Ass'n v. Butz, 526 F.2d 228 (8th Cir. 1975). · cites it 2× “” The district court found that the Order was authorized by § 202 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, 7 U.S.C. § 1621 . 18 We disagree. The broad language of § 202 simply states the policy objectives of the Act.”

West v. Bergland, 611 F.2d 710 (8th Cir. 1979). “The declared intent of the Act is “to provide for * * * an integrated administration of all laws enacted by Congress to aid the distribution of agricultural products through research, market aids and services, and regulatory activities, to the end that marketing methods and…”

Sawyer & Co. v. S. Pac. Co., 238 N.E.2d 357 (Mass. 1968). “” The foregoing is followed by a printed statement which reads: “This certificate is issued in compliance with the regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture governing the inspection of various products pursuant to the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended ( 7 U. S. C.…”

Indep. Meat Packers Ass'n v. Butz, 395 F. Supp. 923 (D. Neb. 1975). · cites it 2× “Jurisdiction is founded under 7 U.S.C. § 1621 et seq., 28 U.S.C. § 1331 , 5 U.”

Show all 24 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.