Ripeness | Knick

Yesterday, in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers, Inc. v. Davenport, No. 24-781 (Apr. 29, 2026), the U.S. Supreme Court held that an organization which provides counseling and resources to pregnant women had standing to bring a First Amendment challenge to the New Jersey Attorney General’s subpoena which sought information about the organization’s donors. Interesting issue, for sure. But what’s the case doing here? Well, among other things, the Court held the case was ripe. Ah, now you get it.
Continue Reading SCOTUS Gives Takings Ripeness Hints In First Amendment Opinion

Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following. After a loss at the Eighth Circuit, the property owners have filed a cert petition.

This is the case where court concluded that the city’s issuance of a closure order to reVamped after the business ended up on the city’s “blighted list” was not a regulatory taking. The city had issued citations for various code violations, sent compliance orders, and was apparently reacting to a fire on the premises.
Continue Reading New Cert Petition: Invoking “Police Power” Alone Doesn’t Avoid Takings

Two or three steps? You decide. A takings case arising from the same locality in Rhode Island that gave us Palazzolo (Westerly, R.I.). In DiBiccari v. Rhode Island, No. 2023-353 (Mar. 10, 2026), the Rhode Island Supreme Court held that the owner’s federal takings claim was not ripe because even though the State agency had denied a variance to allow installation of a wastewater system, the owner had not pursued the agency’s administrative appeals process. …
Continue Reading RI: Federal Takings Claim Must Be Ripened By Exhausting State Admin Remedies By Appealing Variance Denial

The latest from the lawyers who brought you Knick v. Township of Scott. A new cert petition challenging the Eleventh Circuit’s conclusion that a property owner asserting a due process violation must effectively exhaust state judicial remedies. …
Continue Reading New Cert Petition (Ours): Must A Due Process Claimant Exhaust State Remedies?

Although Knick knocked out the Supreme Court-created requirement that before an owner may assert a takings claim, he must first effectively exhaust available state procedures for obtaining compensation, it left the other ripeness requirement — that the government has made a “final decision” applying the challenged law to the owner — in place. Despite the Supreme Court in Pakdel noting that the final decision rule is a “relatively modest” requirement and does not require exhaustion of remedies (administrative or otherwise), some lower courts refuse to accept the message. Well here’s one that not only gets its wrong, it gets it seriously wrong.
Continue Reading Say What? CA4: Takings Claim Not Ripe Because Owner Could Always Change The Law

Check out this new (ish) cert petition which asks whether the “final decision” ripeness rule that currently governs regulatory takings cases is also applicable when the right alleged to have been violated is procedural due process.

The petition sets out how the lower federal courts have dealt with the question:

This case presents an important…

In Grand v. City of University Heights, No. 24-3876 (Nov. 13, 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that a complaint alleging a RLUIPA claim and others was not ripe because they are “land use” claims subject to Williamson County‘s final decision requirement.

A neighbor was “displeased” that Grand…

2011-05-14_16-31-39_422

Who likes paying a lot for prescription medications? Anyone?

Oregon sure didn’t like it, and it was going to do something about it. In 2018, it adopted a statute the “Prescription Drug Price Transparency Act,” which requires manufacturers to report to the State information about costs, revenues, and prices of certain prescription drugs. The Act…