## Facts

- Congress authorized creation and management of federal forest reservations and allowed their use only for lawful purposes subject to rules and regulations.
- Under this authority, the Secretary of Agriculture issued regulations requiring permits (and related charges) to graze sheep on the Sierra Forest Reserve in California.
- Pierre Grimaud and other stockmen grazed sheep on the reserve without obtaining the required permits.
- The defendants were indicted for pasturing sheep on a forest reservation without the permit required by the Secretary’s regulations.
- The defendants did not dispute the unpermitted grazing; they argued the regulatory scheme was unconstitutional because it let the Secretary effectively define criminal conduct.

## Issues

1. Whether Congress unconstitutionally delegated legislative power by authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to issue binding regulations governing use of forest reservations, including grazing-permit requirements.
2. Whether Congress may impose criminal penalties for violating agency regulations when Congress sets the penalty by statute but leaves specific operational details to the agency.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the district court’s dismissal of the indictments.
- The Court held that Congress may authorize an executive officer to make administrative rules to carry out statutory objectives and to supply operational details.
- The Court held that properly issued regulations under the forest-reserve statutes have the force of law.
- The Court held that criminal punishment for violating such regulations is constitutional when Congress has made violations punishable and has fixed the penalty by statute.
- The Court recognized authority to require charges for use of forest-reserve resources as part of the statutory administrative scheme.

## Legal Principles

- Congress may not delegate legislative power, but it may delegate authority to make administrative rules implementing a statutory policy and supplying details.
- Agency regulations can have the force of law when issued under valid statutory authorization.
- When Congress provides by statute that violations of valid regulations are offenses and prescribes the penalty, Congress (not the agency) defines the crime and fixes the punishment.
- Use of federal property subject to statutory regulations may be conditioned on compliance with permit systems; any prior informal tolerance of unregulated use may be curtailed by Congress.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld the forest-reserve statutory scheme, ruling that Congress permissibly empowered the Secretary of Agriculture to issue grazing-permit regulations and that violations could be criminally punished because Congress, by statute, authorized enforcement and set the penalty while the agency supplied administrative details.


United States v. Grimaud, 220 U.S. 506 (1911)