The Chief Justice dropped a key footnote in yesterday’s 8-0 major victory for property rights v Endangered Species Act extremism: “Intervenor Center for Biological Diversity raises an additional ques- tion in its brief, arguing that Weyerhaeuser lacks standing to challenge 1
the critical-habitat designation because it has not suffered an injury in fact. We agree with the lower courts that the decrease in the market value of Weyerhaeuser’s land as a result of the designation is a sufficiently concrete injury for Article III purposes. 2
See Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U. S. 365, 386 (1926) (holding that a zoning ordinance that ‘greatly . . . reduce[d] the value of appellee’s lands and destroy[ed] their marketability for industrial, commercial and residen- tial uses’ constituted 3
a ‘present invasion of appellee’s property rights’.)” Thid telegraphs that #SCOTUS is open for business to landowners injured by regulatory actions, including zoning, “waters of the U.S.” designations, species listings, critical habitat designations. Bring one case, bring all. 4
And don’t hesitate to kitchen sink the complaint. Not even sure that #SCOTUS might not revisit Village of Euclid which is the original sin against property rights in the name of progressivism. Houston has done fine without zoning (and with regulatory takings that zoning works.) 5
