PLF in the Supreme Court

PLF in the Supreme Court

PLF in the Supreme CourtPacific Legal Foundation (PLF) is one of the most active and effective public interest legal organizations in filings before the Supreme Court of the United States. PLF has had an unprecedented seven wins in its last seven direct appearances before the High Court for its clients, including two in the last two years — a record of success unmatched by any other public interest legal organization.

Landmark Supreme Court Victories

Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District (2013).

Koontz-in-USSCThe U.S. Supreme Court handed a victory to all property owners by ruling in favor of PLF client, Coy Koontz Jr., in his constitutional challenge to the heavy, unjustified demands that his family faced as a condition for a building permit. The 5-4 ruling affirms that the Fifth Amendment protects landowners from government extortion, whether the extortion is for money or any other form of property.


Rapanos v. United States (2006).

This decision narrowed the scope of federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction, so that landowners who are not close to “navigable waters” may not be subjected to federal micromanaging of their property.


Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (1997).

SuitumThis ruling stopped regulators from demanding that an elderly, wheelchair-bound widow’s attempt to sell her minuscule transferable development rights in a nonexistent market before being able to seek judicial relief for denial of her right to build a home.


Keller v. State Bar of California (1990).

A First Amendment case holding that a trade or professional organization to which professionals are legally bound to belong may not use their mandatory dues to fund ideologically based lobbying.

 

Sackett v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2012).

In a unanimous decision, the Court held that property owners have a right to direct, meaningful judicial review if the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency effectively seizes control of their property by declaring it to be “wetlands.” The Court ruled in favor of Mike and Chantell Sackett, of Priest Lake, Idaho, who were told by EPA — and by the Ninth Circuit — that they could not get direct court review of EPA’s claim that their two-thirds of an acre parcel is “wetlands” and that they must obey a detailed and intrusive EPA “compliance” order, or be hit with fines of up to $75,000 per day.


Palazzolo v. Rhode Island (2001).

This ruling held that government is not relieved from its Fifth Amendment obligation to provide compensation for excessive regulations on private property merely because the property has changed hands since the regulations first took effect. PLF defended landowner Anthony Palazzolo who challenged the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council.


Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987).

NollanThe Supreme Court struck down a requirement that Marilyn and Patrick Nollan give away one-third of their beachfront lot in exchange for a permit to replace an old dilapidated one-story home with a new two-story home, in keeping with the neighborhood.  The Court called the scheme an “out-and-out plan of extortion.”  From this date forward all permit conditions imposed on land development must be related to actual harms caused by the development.


   
 

PLF Client Highlight

"We worked very hard for our home and for our retirement dreams - the city is trying to take it all away from us. We really appreciate PLF for giving us a voice and taking our case. The time has come, we need to fight back."
Daniel & Maria Levin

Connect with Us       Donate to PLF


PLF Client Highlight

"PLF allowed me to keep operating my business, even in the midst of a crisis. My business means the world to me and my family - PLF saved it for us. Thank you."
R.J. Bruner, Wildcat Moving Co.

Connect with Us       Donate to PLF


PLF Client Highlight

"A 20 year battle is over, thanks to Pacific Legal Foundation.  My father would be proud. Thank you PLF for your support."
Coy Jr. and Linda Koontz

Connect with Us       Donate to PLF


What Your Support Means

Donate to PLF

 

A PLF Victory for Freedom

Supreme Court Victories


PLF Donor Highlight

"For PLF, it's not a job - it's a passion. You can feel very good about how well your money is used in support of the programs they have."
Dr. Robert S. Pepper

Our History       Join The Fight


PLF Donor Highlight

We contribute to a number of “think tanks” whose mission is to protect our freedom and liberty and defend the Constitution. We feel our best return on investment is from PLF which we classify as a “do tank” because of its clearly quantifiable success in accomplishing that mission.

David & Annette Jorgensen

Our History       Join The Fight