United States v. George

Background

A man making a homestead claim at the United States land office in North Platte, Nebraska, was indicted for perjury after he swore that he had built a house, improved the land, and lived there continuously with his family. The indictment said those statements were false and that he took the oath in a proceeding where a federal law allowed an oath to be given. The defendant argued the law actually required proof of residence and cultivation by two other witnesses and did not make the claimant testify; the trial court sustained that objection and dismissed the indictment.

Reasoning

The core question was whether any federal law authorized an oath to be given to the claimant in the way the indictment alleged. The Government relied on Interior Department regulations that required the claimant to testify like a witness, but the Court examined the statute governing homestead proofs and found it specified which facts the claimant must swear to and which facts must be proved by two witnesses. The Court held that administrative regulations cannot add new statutory requirements or create crimes that Congress has not prescribed, so the regulation could not supply the legal basis for a perjury charge.

Real world impact

The decision leaves the indictment dismissed and clarifies that agency rules cannot expand the statutory duties that create criminal liability. People applying for homesteads and similar land titles cannot be prosecuted for perjury based solely on testimony requirements imposed by interior office forms or regulations when Congress set different proof rules. The ruling enforces that Congress, not an agency, determines what sworn proof is required for title to public land.