When Teancum Properties wanted to develop their 22-acre parcel in West Valley City, Utah, they followed every rule. They hired consultants, studied environmental regulations, and filed the proper paperwork with the Army Corps of Engineers. But despite doing everything right, they found themselves trapped by federal bureaucracy.
The Army Corps claimed authority over a salt playa and wetlands on the property, even though these features are separated from any navigable water by a municipal road built decades ago. Under the Supreme Court’s clear ruling in Sackett v. EPA, this road should have eliminated federal jurisdiction entirely.
Teancum Properties filed an administrative appeal challenging the Corps’ jurisdictional determination. The case argues that federal agencies cannot ignore Supreme Court precedent that protects property owners from regulatory overreach. Two years after Sackett, the Corps continues applying outdated theories that the Supreme Court rejected.
The stakes extend beyond one Utah property. If federal agencies can simply ignore Supreme Court decisions limiting their power, no property owner is safe from arbitrary and unlawful regulation. Teancum Properties is fighting to ensure that constitutional limits on government power are respected and that property owners have clear, predictable rules they can follow.
What’s At Stake?
- Property owners deserve clear boundaries on federal wetlands jurisdiction so they can use their land without fear of crushing penalties.
- Federal agencies cannot ignore Supreme Court decisions that protect constitutional property rights.
