The Seidenstickers’ plans were abruptly shut down when their project was appealed to the California Coastal Commission on February 7, 2023.
If the government wants a public monument, it must pay for one—not force private homeowners to foot the bill. The City of Los Angeles is no exception.
In July 2025, after a nearly thirteen-year odyssey through Hawaii’s trial and appellate courts, Don Williams secured a major victory.
Natural Lands petitioned the Supreme Court to take the case and affirm that you can seek relief in federal court when the government violates your right to due process, even if you have not exhausted every potential state-level procedure.
Represented at no cost by Pacific Legal Foundation, Ruda, Knauer, and Zarnegar filed a lawsuit arguing that the City can’t make housing more affordable by making it more expensive to build—and that it can’t fine property owners for problems they didn’t create.
Leslie Daniels filed a federal lawsuit challenging Palm Beach's actions as an unconstitutional taking of his property and a violation of his First Amendment right to post signs on his own land.
The Blakeys, like all American citizens, have a right to access the courts to resolve property disputes. They filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their case. The petition asks the Court to overturn the lower court decision holding that tribal governments have absolute immunity to quiet title actions, thereby barring the Blakeys from resolving their property dispute in court.
Sovereign immunity is not the silver bullet the State of Arkansas claims. Under decades of legal precedent, the government’s constitutional obligations to citizens qualify as “waivers” of sovereign immunity, meaning citizens do not have to wait for the government to give them permission to sue over a violation of their constitutional rights. These “waivers” include the government's obligation to pay you when they take your property.
Represented by Pacific Legal Foundation, Rom filed an appeal with the South Carolina Court of Appeals to challenge the agency’s attempted power grab. He argues that the DES cannot claim power to act outside the scope of its jurisdiction and asks the court to overturn the agency’s demand that he destroy his seawall.