Environmental Protection

Court Skeptical Of Takings Argument

Washington, DC – After oral argument in the significant Fifth Amendment “takings” case at the Supreme Court in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, Constitutional Accountability Center President Doug Kendall – who was in the court today to watch the argument – had the following reaction:


“This case involves the ability of federal, state, and local governments to ensure that developers pay for the very real costs that their development imposes on the community. It appeared at oral argument today that a majority of Justices were skeptical of the merits of the claim alleged. Justice Scalia repeatedly asked counsel for Mr. Koontz, ‘Where is the taking here?’ That’s the right question, and the correct answer is, ‘There is none.’”






CAC’s “friend of the court” brief in Koontz, filed on behalf of the American Planning Association, the City of New York, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation: http://theusconstitution.org/cases/koontz-v-st-johns-river-water-management-district 


“Commentary: The takings clause meets the Roberts Court,” January 14, 2013: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleSCI.jsp?id=1202583850829 (subscription required, full text available on request)


“Property Rights Advocates Can’t Handle the Truth: Chief Justice Roberts, Takings Litigation, and Koontz,” January 14, 2013: https://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1767/property-rights-advocates-can%E2%80%99t-handle-truth-chief-justice-roberts-takings


“Too Rich to Lose Money? AIG, the Takings Clause and the Roberts Court,” January 14, 2013: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-kendall/too-rich-to-lose-money-ai_b_2471584.html




Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.



More from Environmental Protection

Corporate Accountability

Intuit, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

In Intuit Inc v. Federal Trade Commission, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the FTC’s authority to issue cease-and-desist orders against false and misleading advertising is constitutional.
Rule of Law
June 20, 2024

Opinion | The tragedy of the Supreme Court’s bump stock ruling

Washington Post
Don’t let technicalities, or a refusal to use common sense, become the enemy of public...
By: Nina Henry
Access to Justice
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court rejects artificial limit on liability for speech-based retaliation by government officers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s Supreme Court decision in Gonzalez v. Trevino, a case in...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Civil and Human Rights
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court decision keeps the door open to accountability for police officers who make false charges

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Chiaverini v. City...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Corporate Accountability
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: In narrow ruling, Supreme Court rejects baseless effort to shield corporate-derived income from taxation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Moore v. United...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Rule of Law
June 19, 2024

The Supreme Court’s approach on ‘history and tradition’ is irking Amy Coney Barrett

Washington (CNN) — On a Supreme Court where the conservative supermajority increasingly leans on history as a...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Devan Cole, John Fritze