High-profile amici back PLF’s Murr property-rights case
WASHINGTON, D.C.; April 22, 2016: Dozens of high-profile entities, including national business, industry and trade associations, think tanks, legal foundations – and nine states – submitted amicus curiae briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court this week, siding with Pacific Legal Foundation in PLF’s precedent-setting case for property-owners’ rights, Murr v. State of Wisconsin and St. Croix County.
All of the briefs urge the court to rule in favor of PLF’s clients, Donna Murr and her siblings Joseph Murr, Michael Murr, and Peggy Heaver. Officials barred them from selling or making use of a vacant lot they own on the St. Croix River, without offering “just compensation” as required by the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, because the Murrs also own a neighboring lot with a recreational cabin on it.
The litigation is precedent-setting because the strategy used by regulators to avoid takings liability in this case has been employed in many parts of the country. Officials will arbitrarily treat separate, adjacent lots owned by the same person as if they were a single property – and claim that they can deny the use of one of the lots without compensation, on the grounds that the “whole” property has not been taken.
The amicus brief from Nevada and eight other states urges the Supreme Court to forbid this tactic and rule against their sister State of Wisconsin and St. Croix County: “Aggregating contiguous parcels under common ownership into a single super-parcel,” contends the brief, “will undermine traditional notions of property rights … and encourage the undisciplined regulation of individuals’ and states’ property.”
“Pacific Legal Foundation and the Murrs are grateful to all the parties that have filed in support of the Murrs’ property rights and, by extension, everyone’s property rights,” said PLF General Counsel John M. Groen. “As the ‘friend of the court’ briefs recognize, land-use officials cannot be allowed to do an end-run around the Fifth Amendment and its ban on uncompensated takings. If regulators tell you that you can’t use your land, you must be reimbursed. That’s a basic constitutional protection, and you can’t be robbed of it just because you might own another piece of property next door.”
The list of “friends of the court” in support of PLF in the Murr case includes:
Nevada, joined by Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, Oklahoma, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Wyoming
Chamber of Commerce of the United States
National Association of Home Builders, The Real Estate Roundtable, National Association of REALTORS®, along with five other national real-estate and building associations, and leading builders of America
California Cattlemen’s Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, and National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center
Wisconsin REALTORS® Association
Cato Institute and Owners’ Counsel of America
Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
Mountain States Legal Foundation
New England Legal Foundation
Southeastern Legal Foundation and The Beacon Center
About Pacific Legal Foundation
Donor-supported PLF is a watchdog organization that litigates for limited government, property rights, and free enterprise, nationwide. PLF represents the Murrs without charge, as with all its clients.
Case CommentarySee all posts
Good news out of Wisconsin: The Legislature has acted to shore up the rights of property owners that the U.S. Supreme Court undercut earlier this year in its unfortunate decision in Murr v. Wisconsin.Read more
Mike Murr talks about what it was like finding out that his family’s property rights case against St. Croix County and the state of Wisconsin would be heard in front … ›Read more
Too often, property rights and conservation are treated as if they are in tension But, in reality, property rights are a proven means to encourage responsible stewardship, resolve conflicts over limited resources, and empower environmentalists to protect resources they value
To achieve these positive environmental ends, however, property rights must be secure If courts do not protect them, or the law makes who has what rights fuzzy, they will be less effective and there will be more conflict That’s why PLF joined with the Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) to file this amicus brief in the Maine SupremeRead more