Paul v. United States (SCOTUS 1963), 371 U.S. 245

Summary

The Court held that California's minimum milk prices could not be applied to purchases for military use paid from appropriated funds because federal procurement law required competition and federal officers to obtain the most advantageous terms. It also held that the record was insufficient to determine whether California's price law governed milk bought with nonappropriated funds on particular federal enclaves, requiring vacatur and remand for fact-specific findings. Justice Stewart, joined by Justices Harlan and Goldberg, dissented in part, concluding that Congress had not displaced generally applicable state price regulations.

Holding

Direct appellate jurisdiction. The direct appeal was properly before the Supreme Court because the suit was required to be heard by a three-judge court and presented a substantial federal question concerning federal procurement and federal jurisdiction over the installations.

Application of California minimum prices to purchases made with appropriated funds. California could not enforce its minimum milk prices against purchases for military use and commissary resale made with appropriated funds because the federal procurement regime required competitive procurement and federal officers to obtain the most advantageous contract, whereas the state system fixed prices and eliminated competition.

Application of California minimum prices to purchases made with nonappropriated funds on federal enclaves. The Court could not finally determine on the existing record whether California's current milk price controls applied to purchases and sales made with nonappropriated funds. The judgment was therefore vacated as to that class of transactions and remanded for determination of the relevant acquisition dates, the existence of California's basic price-control law at those times, the locations of the transactions, and the federal jurisdictional status of the particular tracts.

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities