Deere Challenge to FTC Authority Rejected in Tractor-Repair Suit

A federal judge denied tractor giant Deere & Co.'s attempt to get an early win in a government lawsuit alleging the company has a tractor-repair monopoly.

Judge Iain D. Johnston of the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois turned aside Deere’s argument Monday that the government’s claims were factually and legally insufficient regarding the company’s power in the “aftermarket” for tractors.

The judge also rejected Deere’s challenges to the FTC’s constitutional structure, including arguments related to the Supreme Court’s 1935 decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, as well as the states’ standing and timeliness in bringing the case.

“To be sure, like nearly all sequels, Deere edited the dialogue and cast some new characters, giving cameos to veteran stars like Humphrey’s Executor,” Johnston wrote, referencing an earlier ruling that denied Deere a judgment on the pleadings in multidistrict litigation over similar alleged conduct. “But ultimately the plot felt predictable, the script derivative.”

Deere didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The FTC in January sued Deere in a Chicago federal court—alongside Arizona, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin—alleging the company holds monopoly power over fully functional repairs on its equipment.

Among Deere’s defenses to the suit was whether the FTC can constitutionally bring it. Deere argued that because of changes to the FTC’s powers since Humphrey’s Executor that cast doubt on the removal protections for FTC commissioners, the agency’s ability to bring lawsuits under Section 13(b) of the law that created the FTC is also in question. Deere contended that the proper remedy would be to strike down Section 13(b).

Johnston rejected Deere’s argument, holding that even if the removal restrictions are unconstitutional, the commissioners’ actions aren’t invalid.

“In this case, the FTC initially voted to commence litigation under then-President Biden, and Deere doesn’t assert that he disagreed with the Commissioners’ judgment,” the court opinion said. “And the current FTC, which believes its Commissioners are removable at-will, are proceeding with this litigation—at least for now. So, Deere can’t challenge the removal regime because the provision doesn’t harm it.”

“For the past fifty years, the FTC has brought Section 13(b) cases hundreds of times,” Johnston said. “Deere points to no court that found the Section unconstitutional. The Court declines the invitation to be the first.”

Deere is represented by Jones Day and Latham & Watkins LLP.

The case is FTC v. Deere & Co., Bankr. N.D. Ill., 25-cv-50017, 6/9/25.