This just in: in this Order, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari and agreed to review two cases which involve property and property rights.
First, in Pung v. Isabella County, No. 25-95, the Court will be considering these Questions Presented:
1. Whether taking and selling a home to satisfy a debt to
Here’s a cert petition in a case we’ve been following.
This is a water fight in California, and it asks a fundamental question: is the right to beneficial use of water a property right? The Federal Circuit held no, the federal government possesses that right, not these owners.
Continue Reading New Cert Petition: Are Water Rights “Property?”
Just a few weeks ago, we were celebrating our 19th birthday, and our 5,000th post.
Then came the news that our long-time hosting service, Typepad, was shutting down on September 30, 2025, and that if we did not migrate the blog to a new host, it was going dark…permanently.
We have now found a new home: an old friend to legal blogs, LexBlog.
This is a behind-the-scenes fix, so from your side, you shouldn’t see any big changes. You can still find us on the web right here at inversecondemnation.com. For readers who follow along by email, you should continue to see posts showing up in your inbox via Feedblitz or now, LexBlog. Anyone still use RSS? If so, same.
Our content will also remain the same: takings, eminent domain, and property rights goodness.
Continue Reading Never Gonna Give You Up, Never Gonna Let You DownHere’s the cert petition which we filed recently. We won’t be saying much about this one because it is one of ours.
But here’s the Question Presented, which pretty much says it all:
The City of Lathrup Village, Michigan, prohibits leasing commercial property without a license. But the City will not issue a license unless
Be sure to check out the opinion of the Texas Court of Appeals (Fourteenth District) in Jones v. Port Freeport, No. 14-23-00948 (Sep. 18, 2025).
This is a challenge to the Port’s attempt to take property in an historic African-American community, with the stated purpose of the taking being “expansion of the Port Facilities” and “the development of business industries.” Slip op. at 3. The owners objected, asserting that there’s gotta be a plan. Or at least a better plan than that.
Continue Reading Tex App: No Plan, No Public Use, No Eminent Domain: “I’m from the [Port], and I’m here [for a public use]” Is Not Enough
Here’s a case that isn’t about takings and our usual fare, but is nonetheless an example of how dirt law can be fascinating.
In Hilo Bay Marina, LLC v. State of Hawaii, No. SCAP-23-0000310 (Sep. 12, 2025), the Hawaii Supreme Court held that a restriction in a land patent issued by the State of Hawaii’s predecessor-in-interest (the Territory of Hawaii) in 1922, that limited the uses of the land to “Church purposes only” cannot be enforced under the state constitution’s establishment clause.
Continue Reading Restriction In Gov’t-Granted Deed Limiting Uses To “Church purposes” Can’t Be Enforced
In addition to the Friday speaking panels, on Thursday, October 23, the William and Mary Law School Real Estate Law Society (a student organization) is presenting a “re-argument” of the Supreme Court arguments in Kelo v. New London, in recognition of that case’s twentieth anniversary. Arguing for Susette Kelo will be her lawyer in the real case, the Institute for Justice. The Justices will be property law professors and eminent domain practitioners.
Will the Moot Supreme Court reach a different outcome with the benefit of two decades of experience and hindsight? This event is open to the public, so please join us and find out!
Continue Reading 2025 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference Speakers
Several years ago, Owners’ Counsel of America endowed a scholarship in the name of its founder, property rights advocate and trial lawyer Toby Prince Brigham (1934-2021). The scholarship is for a second- or third- year law student to attend the annual three-day ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference (the upcoming Conference will be
On the day we celebrate Constitution Day (or should we say Khaaaaan-stitution Day?) we have to admit that pretty much nothing beats One Named Kirk’s reading of the Preamble.
KIRK: This was not written for chiefs.
Hear me! Hear this! Among my people, we carry many such words as this from many
When government enters the pharmaceutical market as a participant, it naturally changes the dynamics. But when Congress does this, is it a taking?
Medicare Part D is a voluntary prescription drug benefit program for Medicare beneficiaries. When Congress first created Part D in 2003, it barred the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) from