Most Unlikely to Succeed: Substantive Due Process Claims Against Local Governments Applying Land Use Restrictions

The Fifth and 14th Amendments in the Constitution say that the government can’t take away a person’s life, freedom, or stuff without following the legal process. The 14th Amendment applies to the states, so it’s important for local government rules about land use.

If a person thinks their property rights were taken in the wrong way, they have to show that they had a legal right to that property. This could be from state or federal laws. But it’s really hard for landowners to win a case against local government rules about land use. This is because the courts only step in when the government does something really bad, not just when they make a mistake. When landowners argue that local government restrictions on land use violate their rights, they often try to claim that it’s a violation of their due process. But it’s hard for them to win these claims because they have to show that the government’s actions were a result of making laws, which is called legislative conduct. A court case called McKinney v. Pate said that claims like this aren’t valid when the government’s actions are more about making decisions than making laws. This idea was later used in a Florida case called City of Pompano Beach v. Yardarm Restaurant, Inc., which said that things like issuing or taking away building permits are not protected under due process. Basically, zoning and building officials can make decisions about land use, but they can’t make laws about it. When challenging a land use restriction, it’s important to prove that you have a property interest, like a building permit. In Florida, a building permit issued by mistake can be revoked, and there is no property interest in a permit or future permits. When a government denies a permit, you can either appeal the denial or file a lawsuit for a taking. However, you can’t do both. Landowners and developers also have to show that they have a legitimate claim to a desired land use or approval in order to protect their property interests. This can be tough because different federal courts have different rules for these types of cases. Landowners may face difficulties when challenging land use restrictions in court. Government officials may have immunity for their actions as long as they do not violate clearly established constitutional rights. When it comes to land use regulations, the government only needs to show that its actions are rationally related to a legitimate government interest, making it difficult for landowners to challenge these restrictions. Landowners have the burden of proof to show that the government’s actions are arbitrary or capricious, which is hard to do under the deference given to local governments. Since property ownership is not considered a fundamental right, courts tend to be lenient in allowing government regulations. The 14th Amendment protects against taking away someone’s property without following the correct legal process. Before suing a local government for not following this process, the landowner must have tried all other options available to them. Having the chance for a hearing is important to meet due process requirements. If a landowner is given a hearing, has a lawyer, and agrees to a settlement, that is considered fair due process. However, a landowner can’t claim they didn’t have a hearing if they chose to settle instead. Also, there can’t be a claim for not following the correct legal process for rights created only by state law, like a building permit. Overall, it’s hard for landowners to win cases against local governments for not following the right legal process. Substantive due process claims against local governments don’t usually succeed. Any land use restriction imposed by a local government is not a violation of constitutional rights unless it completely takes away the landowner’s rights and doesn’t further a legitimate government interest. Joseph D. Richards and Alyssa A. Ruge are both lawyers who have studied law and received their degrees from different universities. Joseph currently works for Pasco County, while Alyssa is involved in the Environmental and Land Use Law Section. They are both dedicated to serving the public and improving the justice system.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/most-unlikely-to-succeed-substantive-due-process-claims-against-local-governments-applying-land-use-restrictions/