Supreme Court Rules Legislative Permit Fees Subject to Takings Clause

The unanimous decision underscores the applicability of the Takings Clause to fees set by legislation, potentially impacting future property development fees.

• The Supreme Court sided with California homeowner George Sheetz, ruling that traffic impact mitigation fees he was charged are subject to the Takings Clause.
• Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the unanimous decision, challenging the distinction between legislative and administrative permit conditions.
• The ruling does not resolve all issues in the case, leaving some questions about the application of the Nollan/Dolan test to broader property classes.
• Several justices, including Kavanaugh and Sotomayor, cautioned against overly broad interpretations of the ruling, emphasizing its specific context.
• Local governments may continue to impose reasonable permitting conditions, but the door is open for further challenges to similar fees.

3 Articles

SCOTUSblog Newsweek Los Angeles Times