Skip to content
Project Curia
Supreme Court decisions
No. 25-95Jun 23, 2026TaxationAffirmed

The question

Whether "just compensation" under the Fifth Amendment following a property tax sale is measured by the auction sale price or by the property's fair market value.

Pung v. Isabella County

What the Court decided

The Court affirmed the Sixth Circuit. The proper baseline for measuring just compensation after a tax sale is the auction sale price, not the property's hypothetical fair market value, at least when the sale is fairly conducted. The Court grounded this in centuries of English and American law permitting seizure and sale of property to collect taxes, so long as the government returns any surplus proceeds to the debtor. Pung was entitled to the surplus proceeds from the sale, not the difference between the property's assessed value and his tax debt.

How the justices split

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

The Court's opinion

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

The auction sale price, not the property's hypothetical fair market value, is the baseline for just compensation after a tax sale that is fairly conducted. English and American law have for hundreds of years allowed seizure and sale of property to collect taxes, provided the government returns any surplus proceeds to the debtor, and early federal statutes and the Court's precedents applied that rule. Pung's reliance on a Michigan Supreme Court concurrence interpreting the state constitution does not illuminate the Takings Clause, and his cases on seizure of multiple parcels and on eminent domain do not apply because the County sold a single parcel that Pung does not argue could have been subdivided. Thomas joined this opinion except as to Part II-B.

Concurring

Sotomayor, joined by Gorsuch, Jackson

Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion joined by Gorsuch and Jackson. The syllabus does not state the specific position this concurrence advanced.

Concurring in part and in the judgment

Thomas, joined by Gorsuch

Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, joined by Gorsuch except as to a footnote. Thomas joined the Court's opinion except as to Part II-B. The syllabus does not state the specific basis on which this opinion differed from the majority.

How we know · 5 sourced claims
  • The proper baseline for measuring just compensation following a tax sale is the auction sale price, not the property's hypothetical fair market value, at least when the sale is fairly conducted.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • English and American law have for hundreds of years allowed the seizure and sale of property as a tax-collection method, provided the government returns any surplus proceeds to the debtor.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The Sixth Circuit affirmed the District Court, and the Supreme Court affirmed.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Alito delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson, and by Thomas except as to Part II-B.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

  • Thomas filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, joined by Gorsuch except as to a footnote.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

Read the opinion on supremecourt.gov