October Term 2009 · Docket 09-475
Can a court block a crop while an agency reviews it?
Monsanto seeks to plant a new alfalfa crop. Opponents want a court to stop that planting.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Monsanto claims the lower court erred in two ways.
Opponents claim the planting lacks legal authorization.
chief_justice_roberts_asked_why_the_agency_did_not_act
justice_ginsburg_asked_if_the_planting_lacks_authorization
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 39-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 39-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 47-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 47-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 51-9 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 51-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-45
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Monsanto wants to plant a genetically engineered alfalfa crop. Opponents want a court to stop that planting.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 39-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 39-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-45
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 27, 2010.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
Monsanto wants to plant the crop now.
Opponents want the planting to stay stopped.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 39-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 39-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-45
What each side says
Monsanto argues the lower court acted wrongly.
Opponents argue the planting lacks legal approval.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 39-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 39-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-45
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Roberts asked why the agency did not act.
Justice Ginsburg asked if the planting lacks authorization.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 47-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 47-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 51-9 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 51-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-45
Why it matters
Farmers need clear rules for planting new crops. Courts must balance speed and safety.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 39-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 39-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-45
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 47-37 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 47-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 51-9 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 51-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-9 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 41-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 41-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-45
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 39-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 39-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 39-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 39-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-45
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.