Spotlight on property rights
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.
Through the efforts of our attorneys past and present, we have won some of the biggest victories for property rights at the Supreme Court of the United States.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of PLF’s victory in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission. You can read Bob Best’s account of his argument in the case at the Supreme Court and the story of our client, Patrick Nollan.
Legal precedents like Nollan have unquestionably made it more difficult for government regulators to meddle with one of our most precious civil rights, but because government agencies covet power over our property rights, PLF continues to give citizens a voice in the courts to keep them safe and secure.
I invite you to read one of the other articles in our Sword&Scales about Willie Benedetti’s battle against a new law adopted by Marin County that is putting his retirement dreams in jeopardy.
Our commitment to the right to private property in the nation’s courts, and in the court of public opinion, has never been stronger. The path we have blazed for 44 years, to enforce the Constitution’s guarantees of individual liberty and to restrain government’s attempts to tread on them, is straight and true.
As PLF Vice President for Litigation, Jim Burling, notes in Sword&Scales, PLF’s work to vindicate the rights and liberties of property owners is never done.
“For every victory we achieve, governments will try evasion, obfuscation, and massive resistance. Eternal vigilance, backed by eternal litigation, is the price of liberty. That’s why PLF goes to court.”
What to read next
PLF asks the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that there is no “legislative exception” to the unconstitutional conditions doctrine
It seems that some governments and courts prefer to treat Supreme Court precedent as an option, rather than a requirement. The Supreme Court has ruled—twice—that it’s unconstitutional for government to … ›