Facts of the Case

Provided by Oyez

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.


Questions

  1. Did the requirement constitute a property taking in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments?

Conclusions

  1. Justice Scalia held, in a 5-4 opinion, that the Coastal Commission could only place conditions on the Nollans’ development permit to rebuild their home where those conditions substantially furthered government interests that would justify denial of the permit entirely. Because the Nollans’ request to rebuild their home did not further the government’s interest in overcoming a perceived psychological barrier to using the beach, the condition was a regulatory taking without compensation, in violation of the Fifth Amendment.

Click to play: Environmental Law & Property Rights: Justice Scalia's Property Rights Jurisprudence

Environmental Law & Property Rights: Justice Scalia's Property Rights Jurisprudence

2016 National Lawyers Convention

In his nearly 30 years on the Court, Justice Scalia left a profound mark on...