Oom living houses
Oom Living, LLC v. City of Seattle

Fighting Seattle’s permitting extortion to build new housing

The government may not deny a benefit, even a discretionary one, based on a person's exercise of constitutional rights. Represented at no charge by Pacific Legal Foundation, Jenna and Oom are now fighting back with a state lawsuit challenging Seattle's unconstitutional permitting condition.   ...

CTM Holdings LLC v. USDA

Farming family fights government’s illegal restrictions on their livelihood

Iowa attorney Jim Conlan grew up in a farming family, so when considering new investment options, reconnecting with his family legacy through agriculture was a natural fit. But Jim's efforts to support this time-honored industry soon ran headlong into government overreach by regulators that lack his deep respect for farming's critical role in sust ...

Friends of the Crazy Mountains v. Erickson

Defending protections for property owners and respect for property rights

Like much of the American West, the area around Montana's Crazy Mountains—the Crazies—is a checkerboard of federal, state, and private land. Also, as is typical in the western U.S., access to the Crazies' higher-elevation public land is limited and requires permission from private landowners. ...

Chris Heaton
Heaton et al. v. Biden et al.

Ranching family fights President Biden’s Antiquities Act abuse

Chris Heaton is a sixth-generation landowner and rancher who embodies the rugged individualism, adventurism, and tireless work ethic of the American West. Chris's land, family legacy, and rights have landed in the crosshairs of President Biden's new national monument designation. Represented by PLF at no charge, Chris is fighting back with a federa ...

Matthew Schafer, et al. v. Kent County, MI

Holding Michigan counties accountable to stop home equity theft

A court decision's date doesn't dictate the beginning or end of property rights. The Michigan Supreme Court in Rafaeli and the U.S. Supreme Court in Tyler v. Hennepin County both recognized that property interests at stake in government tax foreclosures are deeply rooted and pre-exist state law. Property cannot be taken without just compensation, n ...

Nathan Rimmer v. City of Edmonds, WA

Fighting extortionate “forever tree” permit conditions to build family home

City of Edmonds cannot demand use of Nathan's land that's irrelevant or disproportionate to the permit he's seeking. The City's demand is unconstitutional, invalid, and cannot stand in the way of a final decision on his application. Such a rule serves no purpose other than to further aggrandize local zoning and land use authority while trampling th ...

Sheetz v. County of El Dorado

Supreme Court rules against extortionate permit fees

Once his land was ready and all George needed was a county building permit, he was stunned when told he could have his permit, but only if he paid a so-called traffic impact fee of more than $23,000. George weighed the immense cost against the hard work he put into his land and his yearning for a retirement home, and he paid the fee under protest. ...

Dr. Gregory Ringenberg v. United States

Government’s bogus easements threaten family retreat and property rights

The government cannot take private property without the owner's consent unless it pays just compensation. Nor can the government create an easement where none would otherwise exist. Yet, the Forest Service is using every flimsy excuse it can find to take an easement for an access road that leads to nowhere, without paying for it. Dr. Ringenberg ...

Rhode Island Association of Coastal Taxpayers v. Jeffrey Willis

Rhode Island’s beach expansion law moves public beach onto private property

In America, the right to own, occupy, and use your private property is a cornerstone of individual freedom and protected by the Constitution. If the government takes your property, it must pay just compensation—even when it is taking the property for a "good" purpose.  Rhode Island lawmakers recently ignored these constitutional limits by enacti ...