Skip to content
Project Curia
Supreme Court decisions
No. 22-1074Apr 12, 2024Public Lands and Natural ResourcesVacated and remanded

The question

Whether the Takings Clause tests set out in Nollan and Dolan apply to permit conditions imposed by legislation, or only to conditions imposed on an ad hoc basis by administrators.

Sheetz v. El Dorado County

What the Court decided

The Court vacated the California Court of Appeal's judgment and remanded. It held that the Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land-use permit conditions. The lower courts had ruled against Sheetz on the ground that the Nollan and Dolan tests reach only permit conditions imposed ad hoc by administrators, not fees imposed on a class of property owners by legislation. The Court rejected that distinction, holding that the same constitutional analysis governs both.

How the justices split

Unanimous
In favor 9
Barrett
Roberts
Thomas
Alito
Sotomayor
Kagan
Gorsuch
Kavanaugh
Jackson

The Court's opinion

Barrett, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Jackson

The Takings Clause requires just compensation when the government takes private property, and it prevents the government from using the permitting process to exact property without paying for it. Under Nollan and Dolan, permit conditions must have an essential nexus to the government's land-use interest and rough proportionality to the development's impact. Nothing in these principles turns on whether the condition is imposed by an administrator or by legislation, so the Nollan and Dolan tests apply to legislative permit conditions as well.

Concurring

Sotomayor, joined by Jackson

Filed a concurring opinion joined by Jackson.

Concurring

Gorsuch, writing alone

Filed a concurring opinion.

Concurring

Kavanaugh, joined by Kagan, Jackson

Filed a concurring opinion joined by Kagan and Jackson.

How we know · 5 sourced claims
  • The Court held that the Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land-use permit conditions.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Barrett delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

  • El Dorado County required Sheetz to pay a $23,420 traffic impact fee as a condition of receiving a residential building permit.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Sotomayor, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh each filed a concurring opinion, with Jackson joining Sotomayor's and Kagan and Jackson joining Kavanaugh's.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

  • Under Nollan and Dolan, permit conditions must have an essential nexus to the government's land-use interest and rough proportionality to the development's impact.

    Source: syllabus, Held

Read the opinion on supremecourt.gov