Score Four for Planning: The 2005 Supreme Court Decisions

Zoning Practice — August 2005

By Lora Lucero


ZP subscriber
List Price
Sign In & Download

Not a member but want to buy a copy? You'll need to create a free My APA account to purchase. Create account

Not since perhaps 1987 — when the U.S. Supreme Court had a blockbuster year in the land-use and planning arena with Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn., Granite Rock Co., First English, and Nollan — have the Justices provided so much food for thought to planners and others concerned about land-use law as they did this term.

Four cases and four very different outcomes, and each a "win" for planners and the planning profession. The first jettisoned a troublesome test from future regulatory takings cases. The second held the course and made no changes to the eminent domain clause. The third clarified that there are no money damages and attorneys fees available for challenges of zoning decisions made pursuant to the Telecommunications Act. And the fourth said twhen a state court makes a final decision on a federal takings claim, there will be no further pursuit of a higher court.

This issue of Zoning Practice discusses how the Supreme Court decisions in Lingle, Kelo, Rancho Palos Verdes, and San Remo affect land-use decision making.


Page Count
Date Published
Aug. 1, 2005
Adobe PDF
American Planning Association

About the Author

Lora Lucero