NCLA Site Search

Cases

Gubbels v. USDA

CASE SUMMARY

Did we achieve our litigation objective? Yes. Following the district court’s ruling, the USDA dropped its charges against Kevin Gubbels instead of offering him a fair hearing as the district court suggested.

Court Outcome: Technically, the district court ruled that the USDA was not yet required to respect Kevin Gubbels’ due process rights and provide him a chance to contest the accusations against him before excluding Gubbels from the federal crop insurance program, but it urged USDA to act quickly.

Larger Impact: When an administrative agency wants to levy a punishment, the Constitution requires affording the accused due process of law. By denying Kevin Gubbels an administrative hearing, let alone a day in an impartial court, the USDA acted unlawfully. This judicial brushback reminds agencies they cannot operate above the law.

Summary: NCLA filed a complaint and a motion for preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. The case, Kevin Gubbels and Insure My Honey, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Risk Management Agency, was filed against the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Risk Management Agency (RMA), and the respective heads of those entities. Gubbels contested those agencies’ efforts to suspend and debar his participation in the federal crop insurance program without a hearing.

RMA’s action risked destroying a recently thriving business, and had  already put over 60 insurance agents out of work based on a hearsay complaint without giving the business a chance to contest the accusation at a hearing. Even if Mr. Gubbels had eventually been granted a hearing, the process would have been anything but fair, as the existing regulations consolidate the roles of both prosecutor and judge in the agency head. This in-house administrative adjudication makes a mockery of due process, and seriously threatened Mr. Gubbels’s livelihood.

OUR CLIENT

Kevin Gubbels, Plaintiff

OUR TEAM

John J. Vecchione
Senior Litigation Counsel

RELEVANT MATERIALS

NCLA FILINGS

Notice of Telephonic Hearing Kevin J. Gubbels

December 16, 2020 | Read More

Memorandum and Order of the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska

November 23, 2020 | Read More

Plaintiffs’ Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment, and Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction

July 17, 2020 | Read More

Plaintiffs’ Brief in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction

June 1, 2020 | Read More

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

June 1, 2020 | Read More

PRESS RELEASES

NCLA Suit Challenges Lack of Due Process Hearing in Suspension from USDA Crop Insurance Program

July 17, 2020 | Read More

NCLA Takes USDA to Task over Unlawful Agency Adjudication Procedures that Violate Civil Liberties

June 2, 2020 | Read More

CASE HIGHLIGHTS

RELATED CASES
  • Adir International v. Starr Indemnity and Liability Company

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: California

    View Case
  • American Home Furnishings Alliance, et al. v. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Case Closed - June 30, 2023

    Agencies: Consumer Product Safety Commission

    View Case
  • American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. Walther, Dir., and Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

    View Case
  • American Hospital Association, et al. v. Xavier Becerra, et al.

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Case Closed - June 15, 2022

    Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services

    View Case
  • American Securities Association and Citadel Securities LLC v. United States Securities and Exchange Commission

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Administrative Speech Controls

    The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

    Unreasonable Searches

    The Fourth Amendment forbids warrantless searches and seizures of information, yet the Administrative State violates this right to privacy through administrative subpoenas and warrants, automated information collection devices, civil investigative demands, and “voluntary” requests for information.

    Conditions on Spending

    Administrative agencies use unconstitutional conditions on spending to regulate the conduct of grantees. Rather than rule through law, the government simply purchases submission.

    Case Active - February 15, 2024

    Agencies: Securities and Exchange Commission

    View Case
  • AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC and FTC v. Credit Bureau Center, LLC

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Federal Trade Commission

    View Case

SHARE THIS CASE

Enter your email address above to be notified whenever we post a new document to this case.