Krielow v. La. Dep't of Agric. & Forestry - 2013-1106 ( La. 10/15/13), 125 So. 3d 384

Rule:

The Rice Statutes, La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 3:3534 and 3:3544, unconstitutionally delegate legislative power to rice producers to set the rate of an assessment. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 3:3534(B)(1) and 3:3544(A)(3) provide that the assessment shall not be imposed until the "question of its imposition" and "the amount thereof" have been submitted to and voted on by a majority of the rice producers who vote at a referendum. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 3:3534(B)(1), 3:3544(A)(3). As with the imposition of the assessment itself, the amount of the assessment is voted on by the rice producers. Because the legislature did not set the amount of the assessment in the statute, it has delegated to the rice producers the power to determine what the law will be.

Facts:

In 1972, the Louisiana Legislature enacted La. R.S. 3:3531, et seq. and La. R.S. 3:3541, et seq. The Rice Statutes obligated rice producers to pay an assessment on rice produced in Louisiana “not to exceed three cents per hundredweight." However, the assessment was not imposed unless the rice producers approve it by majority referendum vote. The question of whether to impose the assessment and the amount of the assessment, subject to the "maxima" provided in the statutes, must be submitted to and approved by a majority of the rice producers who vote in the referenda. To be eligible to vote, a producer must have produced a rice crop in the year immediately preceding each referendum. Since the Rice Statutes went into effect, rice producers voting in the periodic referendums have approved the levy of an assessment. The refund provisions were abolished in the 1992 referendum. Plaintiffs, approximately forty rice producers, filed suit against the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry ("LDAF") and the Rice Boards, challenging the constitutionality of the Rice Statutes both on their face and as applied. Thereafter, plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment seeking to declare La. R.S. 3:3534 and La. R.S. 3:3544 facially unconstitutional on the ground those statutes permit an improper delegation of legislative authority, in violation of La. Const. art. III, § 1. Plaintiffs argued that the Rice Statutes permit a small group of private citizens to determine by majority vote whether the LDAF shall enforce and collect statutory assessments on rice, and whether the refund provisions will be abolished. The district court granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in part, declaring those sections of the Rice Statutes relative to abolishment of the refunds, La. R.S. 3:3534(G)(2), (3) and La. R.S. 3:3544(E)(2), (3), unconstitutional. The LDAF, State of Louisiana and the Rice Boards appealed. 

Issue:

Did La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 3:3534 and 3:3544 delegate legislative authority contrary to La. Const. art. III, § 1? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court held that the statutes were unconstitutional because they delegated an assessment's imposition to rice producers, in La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 3:3534(B)(1) and 3:3544(A)(3), without legislative or administrative review. Moreover, the court held that the statutes were unconstitutional because they conditioned a law on a private group's vote, and they did not fit the exception for contingent legislation. The court further held that the statutes unconstitutionally delegated authority to administrative boards because they set no assessment standards, without legislative review.