Swampbuster Rule Challenged in Federal Court

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa — A lawsuit in federal court is challenging the constitutionality of a decades-old conservation rule that ties wetland preservation to federal farm benefits.

The Swampbuster Rule

CTM Holdings, a landholding company based in Iowa, is suing the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and its Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), arguing that the agency’s enforcement of the “Swampbuster” statute constitutes a government overreach and violates private property rights.

The Swampbuster rule, part of the 1985 Farm Bill, bars farmers from receiving federal agricultural benefits if they alter designated wetlands for crop production. CTM claims this requirement effectively strips landowners of the use of their land without providing compensation.

Jim Conlan, owner of CTM Holdings, purchased a 71-acre farm in Delaware County, Iowa, in 2022. A portion of that land—9 acres spread across five forested sections—had been designated as wetlands by NRCS in 2010. CTM argues that the land is not wet and is suitable for farming.

“It’s extremely valuable black dirt and there’s no water on it at any point of the year,” Conlan said in a statement. “We could remove the trees and farm it tomorrow.”

After requesting a re-evaluation of the wetland designation in 2022, CTM says NRCS refused, citing the finality of its previous determination. USDA officials, however, argue that CTM did not follow the correct procedures and that the agency has the authority to maintain wetland designations unless changed by a natural event or proven error.

Constitutional Challenge

The lawsuit claims the statute violates the Constitution on several grounds, including the Fifth Amendment’s protection against uncompensated takings of private property and the Commerce Clause’s limits on federal regulation of isolated lands. CTM is represented by the Liberty Justice Center and the Pacific Legal Foundation.

At a hearing this week, U.S. District Judge C.J. Williams questioned whether the dispute might stem from a misunderstanding between CTM and the NRCS.

Environmental groups, including Food & Water Watch and the Iowa Environmental Council, have intervened in support of the federal government. They argue that removing Swampbuster protections could lead to widespread destruction of wetlands.

“The compensation is clearly the farm benefits that Swampbuster provides access to,” said Dani Replogle, staff attorney for Food & Water Watch.

Broader Impacts

Replogle added that a ruling against the USDA could threaten other conservation policies, including “Sodbuster,” which protects highly erodible lands.

According to a study from the Union of Concerned Scientists, wetlands provide more than $20 billion annually in flood protection nationwide. In Iowa alone, wetland conservation could reduce annual flood damage by nearly $500 million.

The court has not set a timeline for its decision. Both sides indicated they plan to appeal if the ruling is not in their favor.