The Future of Regulatory Takings at the Supreme Court

When it comes to the inextricable link between property rights and freedom, John Adams perhaps said it best: “Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist.”

Even so, assaults on property rights by all levels of government continue, despite state and federal constitutions designed to protect them.

There’s good news, though. Over the past three years, the U.S. Supreme Court has made great strides toward reviving property rights’ critical status within our constitutional structure:

•    Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid affirmed that a fundamental aspect of property ownership is the right to decide who can and cannot access yours.
•    Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania opened federal courts to property takings claims that previously lingered—and usually died—in state courts.
•    Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco ordered a lower court redux by invoking Cedar Point and affirming that the Court meant what it said in Knick.

Though technical in nature, these decisions add remarkable firepower to the legal arsenal tapped by the nation’s best freedom-fighting litigators to restore and protect property rights.

We hope you will join us on September 14 for an exclusive forum to dissect these newly sharpened constitutional tools and explain how they will shape the future of regulatory takings cases at the Supreme Court.