Kelo revisited

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment promises that the government will not take private property unless it is for a valid public use and the owner is fully compensated. … ›

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 … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to revive property rights protections

Yesterday, PLF filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to review a decision that diminishes property rights by throwing unnecessary obstacles to raising Fifth Amendment claims. The story behind this case … ›

PLF files its merits brief in the Knick Supreme Court property case

In late May, PLF attorneys filed this brief on the merits in the case of Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, which is currently before the United States Supreme Court. The … ›

Is property a fundamental right?

The answer to that question should be simple. After all, the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution protects “life, liberty, or property” without qualification. And, for nearly a century, … ›

Weekly litigation update — April 28, 2018

Markle Interests’ brief filed with High Court in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service This week we filed our merits brief in the Supreme Court supporting the landowers in … ›

SCOTUS avoids the administrative elephant in the room

Earlier this week, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, upholding by a 7-2 margin the inter partes review … ›

Washington Supreme Court will not hear important property rights case

Earlier this week, the Washington State Supreme Court denied review of the very troubling appellate decision in Olympic Stewardship Foundation v. State of Washington Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office, … ›

PLF urges the High Court to clarify the rule for interpreting split decisions

The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding some of the most important (and divisive) legal questions with fractured decisions, leaving many to question whether those cases stand for any one legal rule.

Brand Logo for the blog page

Kelo revisited

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment promises that the government will not take private property unless it is for a valid public use and the owner is fully compensated. … ›

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 … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to revive property rights protections

Yesterday, PLF filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to review a decision that diminishes property rights by throwing unnecessary obstacles to raising Fifth Amendment claims. The story behind this case … ›

PLF files its merits brief in the Knick Supreme Court property case

In late May, PLF attorneys filed this brief on the merits in the case of Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, which is currently before the United States Supreme Court. The … ›

Is property a fundamental right?

The answer to that question should be simple. After all, the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution protects “life, liberty, or property” without qualification. And, for nearly a century, … ›

Weekly litigation update — April 28, 2018

Markle Interests’ brief filed with High Court in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service This week we filed our merits brief in the Supreme Court supporting the landowers in … ›

SCOTUS avoids the administrative elephant in the room

Earlier this week, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, upholding by a 7-2 margin the inter partes review … ›

Washington Supreme Court will not hear important property rights case

Earlier this week, the Washington State Supreme Court denied review of the very troubling appellate decision in Olympic Stewardship Foundation v. State of Washington Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office, … ›

PLF urges the High Court to clarify the rule for interpreting split decisions

The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding some of the most important (and divisive) legal questions with fractured decisions, leaving many to question whether those cases stand for any one legal rule.

The Morning Docket

Stay up to date with the Morning Docket, a weekly highlight of PLF's best articles, videos, and podcasts.

Kelo revisited

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment promises that the government will not take private property unless it is for a valid public use and the owner is fully compensated. … ›

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 … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to revive property rights protections

Yesterday, PLF filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to review a decision that diminishes property rights by throwing unnecessary obstacles to raising Fifth Amendment claims. The story behind this case … ›

PLF files its merits brief in the Knick Supreme Court property case

In late May, PLF attorneys filed this brief on the merits in the case of Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, which is currently before the United States Supreme Court. The … ›

Is property a fundamental right?

The answer to that question should be simple. After all, the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution protects “life, liberty, or property” without qualification. And, for nearly a century, … ›

Weekly litigation update — April 28, 2018

Markle Interests’ brief filed with High Court in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service This week we filed our merits brief in the Supreme Court supporting the landowers in … ›

SCOTUS avoids the administrative elephant in the room

Earlier this week, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, upholding by a 7-2 margin the inter partes review … ›

Washington Supreme Court will not hear important property rights case

Earlier this week, the Washington State Supreme Court denied review of the very troubling appellate decision in Olympic Stewardship Foundation v. State of Washington Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office, … ›

PLF urges the High Court to clarify the rule for interpreting split decisions

The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding some of the most important (and divisive) legal questions with fractured decisions, leaving many to question whether those cases stand for any one legal rule.

Kelo revisited

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment promises that the government will not take private property unless it is for a valid public use and the owner is fully compensated. … ›

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 … ›

PLF asks Supreme Court to revive property rights protections

Yesterday, PLF filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to review a decision that diminishes property rights by throwing unnecessary obstacles to raising Fifth Amendment claims. The story behind this case … ›

PLF files its merits brief in the Knick Supreme Court property case

In late May, PLF attorneys filed this brief on the merits in the case of Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, which is currently before the United States Supreme Court. The … ›

Is property a fundamental right?

The answer to that question should be simple. After all, the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution protects “life, liberty, or property” without qualification. And, for nearly a century, … ›

Weekly litigation update — April 28, 2018

Markle Interests’ brief filed with High Court in Weyerhaeuser v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service This week we filed our merits brief in the Supreme Court supporting the landowers in … ›

SCOTUS avoids the administrative elephant in the room

Earlier this week, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, upholding by a 7-2 margin the inter partes review … ›

Washington Supreme Court will not hear important property rights case

Earlier this week, the Washington State Supreme Court denied review of the very troubling appellate decision in Olympic Stewardship Foundation v. State of Washington Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office, … ›

PLF urges the High Court to clarify the rule for interpreting split decisions

The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding some of the most important (and divisive) legal questions with fractured decisions, leaving many to question whether those cases stand for any one legal rule.