Local news covers Koontz’s property rights battle
Fox News in Orlando ran this story about our U.S. Supreme Court case, Koontz v. St. John’s River Water Management District. The reporter provides one of the best summaries of the case I have heard: the district said, before you can use your land, you have to pay to fix up our land.
Sadly, the government still doesn’t seem to understand why Mr. Koontz objected to this “deal.” According to the reporter, the district said that Mr. Koontz could have avoided this lawsuit by “just paying” the district’s demand. But, as Mr. Koontz said, giving in to the district’s demand would mean “saying the Constitution doesn’t make that much sense anymore.”
To Mr. Koontz, this case is about much more than his personal struggle with the district. “We really need to win this, again, not just for us, but for everyone, because this erosion, this creeping erosion by government to take over. It is not good, and it will continue to destroy.”
What to read next
Shed a (crocodile) tear for Luke Skywalker today, as Mark Hamill’s much ballyhooed Autograph Law is set to be undone and reformed by the same California officials who made the mistake to pass it in the first place. AB 228 has arrived at the Governor’s desk, and in all likelihood will be signed into law any day.
Our new flagship publication, Sword&Scales, offers 16 pages of news and information to bring you up close to the vital work of our legal team. Our ardent defense of the right to own and use private property takes center stage in the inaugural issue. It’s at the core of our mission in the nation’s courts.
On Thursday, in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF filed this reply brief in support of its cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. In this case, we’re representing Minnesota voters in a First Amendment challenge to a ban on political apparel at polling places.
The Daily Journal published my column on California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, recently decided by the California Supreme Court. As the op-ed points out, the ruling undermines Proposition 218’s requirements that all new taxes at the local level need voter approval.