Federal court hears case representing historic mining company stripped of Seventh Amendment rights
In 2024, a historic mining company found itself before an agency tribunal. The company represented itself, filing petitions with the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission to deny and vacate the unconstitutional judgment. Instead of an independent courtroom with an independent judge and a neutral jury, the Secretary of Labor forced American Tripoli to stand before an executive tribunal, resulting in a denial of their petitions and over $40,000 in civil monetary penalties.
To vindicate its constitutional rights, American Tripoli petitioned the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals with the help of Pacific Legal Foundation. The court heard oral arguments today on whether American Tripoli was entitled to a trial by jury in a real court.
A historic mine and the American dream
American Tripoli operates a silicon dioxide mine in Seneca, Missouri. Founded in 1869, American Tripoli mines the naturally occurring substance and pulverizes it into powder used in common household products like toothpaste and spices.
In 2021, U.S. Army veteran Russell Tidabeck and his daughter Jordan bought the company with the hope of reviving the mine. In 2023, Russell fired an employee for failing to meet company standards and neglectfully accompanying an inspector during a routine survey of the mine—creating a safety risk for other miners. But according to the fired miner, he was terminated for speaking to an inspector.
The fired miner filed a complaint with the Commission, alleging wrongful termination—and the Secretary of Labor responded by filing a case against American Tripoli, seeking more than $40,000 in penalties and damages.
The Administrative Law Judge of the Commission, finding that the employee’s firing constituted retaliatory discharge, ordered American Tripoli to pay penalties and damages. On appeal to the Commission, predictably, the Commission did not disturb the ALJ’s decision.
Within months, Russell and Jordan’s hopes of revitalizing a dying mine and company were dashed by an unconstitutional agency proceeding; that’s why they appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Upholding our structural constitution
During oral argument, Pacific Legal Foundation Attorney Adi Dynar argued that American Tripoli is not required to pursue or resolve every question at the agency before taking the case to federal court. Because of the nature of American Tripoli’s constitutional claims—including access to an independent court and the right to a jury trial—the company can raise these constitutional questions in federal court, with the entirety of the agency’s administrative proceedings being the primary issue.
Under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, the Secretary and the Commission argue that constitutional claims should be raised first during the administrative proceedings—and if not so raised, federal courts cannot decide those constitutional claims. This exhaustion-of-issues requirement, American Tripoli says, makes no sense where the agency is powerless to resolve or avoid the constitutional issues.
Pursuing every conceivable administrative avenue “is not required where structural constitutional claims presented for the first time to the federal court cannot be resolved or avoided by the agency,” Adi Dynar said during oral arguments.
The underlying problem is the executive adjudication of private rights, which violates Article III’s promise of an independent judiciary and the Seventh Amendment’s protection of the right to a jury trial. And there is nothing that the Commission can do to avoid or solve these constitutional problems.
In his closing statement, Dynar referenced the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in SEC v. Jarkesy, saying that American Tripoli’s case falls within the constitutional protections of the Seventh Amendment. Considering retaliatory discharge claims—which have a clear-cut common law analog—and the civil penalties—actions in debt at common law—American Tripoli was unconstitutionally deprived of its private property rights by the executive branch. To the contrary, the Constitution’s separation of powers demands the executive branch to prosecute alleged violations of the law as established by Congress in actual courts with jury trials where appropriate.
The court said that an opinion will be expected in a few weeks. But in the meantime, Pacific Legal Foundation will continue to litigate these issues, advocating for the constitutional right to an actual court and jury trial.
