|
Abstract
| Argument: |
Monday, March 30, 1987
|
| Decision: |
Friday, June 26, 1987 |
| Issues: |
Due Process, Takings Clause |
| Categories: |
eminent domain, fifth amendment, fourteenth amendment, police power, property, takings clause |
| Tags: |
Rehnquist: Miscellaneous, Rehnquist on iTunes U |
|
Advocates
|
Facts of the Case
The California Coastal Commission required owners of beachfront property wishing to obtain a building permit to maintain a pathway on their property open to the public.
Question
Did the requirement constitute a property taking in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments?
Conclusion
Yes. The Court agreed that a legitimate interest may be served by maintaining a "continuous strip of publicly accessible beach along the coast." However, reasoned Justice Scalia, if California wished to use its power of eminent domain to do so, it must provide just compensation to the Nollans and other beachfront property owners for the public use of their land.