A surprising state court decision last month breathed new life into a battle concerning a business that had been barred from even seeking compensation after law enforcement allegedly damaged property worth thousands of dollars.
uncertain
enforcement → breathe → dollars
The case, which pitted a legal hemp grower against police in Georgia, overturned precedent in the state and is yet another twist in the legal debate over how insulated government is when exercising "police power."
asserted
government → pit → power
In July 2021, the Georgia Department of Public Safety (DPS) reportedly destroyed $37,000 worth of hemp crops by flying helicopters and a fixed-wing aircraft at low altitude during a "drug-suppression exercise."
uncertain
Department → destroy → exercise
That was bad news for Blue 42 Organics, LLC, a licensed hemp grower that properly registered with both the Georgia and U.S. Departments of Agriculture.
asserted
that → register → Agriculture
When Blue 42 sued, the trial court said the claim was dead on arrival.
uncertain
claim → sue → arrival
The state's DPS had been exercising its police powers, it said, and the company was thus precluded from redress under the Just Compensation Clause of the Georgia Constitution, which promises that "private property shall not be taken or damaged for public purposes without just and adequate compensation being first paid."
asserted
compensation → exercise → purposes
The fine print would seem pretty clear.
asserted
print → seem → ?
But the ruling from the trial court, which was originally upheld on appeal, is part of a long line of jurisprudence that had categorically barred such claims and effectively immunized government from providing just compensation to people whose property was damaged via police power.
uncertain
property → uphold → power
The Georgia Supreme Court departed from this tradition.
asserted
Court → depart → tradition
"The Constitution's promise to protect private property rights would be an empty one if the State is permitted to avoid paying just compensation for taking or damaging private property merely by invoking the police power," the justices held unanimously.
asserted
justices → protect → power
"Almost everything that the State (and local governments by delegation) does is, in theory, for the public's safety, health, and morals, including constructing roads, conducting law enforcement operations, and passing zoning ordinances.
asserted
everything → include → ordinances
DPS offers no limiting principle.
asserted
DPS → offer → principle
In doing so, the court overturned McCoy v. Sanders, a 1966 case that saw police drain a landowner's pond while searching for the body of a murder victim.
asserted
police → do → victim
The government did need not to compensate the owner for the ensuing damage, the decision concluded, because it occurred in the exercise of police power.
asserted
it → need → power
Sixty years later, the state's high court said that general line of thinking had gone too far.
asserted
line → say → thinking
"The police power includes virtually everything the State can do," the justices wrote, "and such a broad exemption as articulated by McCoy — just compensation is precluded when state agents act under the police or governmental power — would effectively sweep away the Just Compensation Clause.
asserted
agents → include → Clause
On the flip side, the court did not sweep away the entirety of the exemption.
asserted
court → sweep → exemption
"There are two identified categories clearly delineated in our case law — abatement of nuisances and destruction of property in cases of urgent necessity — that have been described as an exercise of police power exempt from the requirement of just compensation," the justices wrote.
asserted
justices → be → compensation
So, for instance, if the government destroys a building to stop a fire from spreading, as was the case
asserted
government → destroy → fire
in Bowditch v. Boston (1879), the owner is not entitled to compensation.
asserted
owner → entitle → compensation
Similar claims have also been playing out on the national stage.
uncertain
claims → play → stage
Amy Hadley's Indiana home was ransacked by police after a detective's shoddy investigation led them there, while Carlos Pena's California printing business was ravaged by a SWAT team as officers sought to capture a suspect who had barricaded himself inside.
asserted
who → ransack → himself
Both were denied compensation under similar legal reasoning, despite the fact that neither was suspected of a crime.
asserted
neither → deny → crime
They have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
asserted
They → appeal → Court
The justices on the country's highest court have previously declined to hear petitions on the subject.
asserted
justices → decline → subject
"Whether any such exception exists (and how the Takings Clause applies when the government destroys property pursuant to its police power) is an important and complex question," wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor in 2024, "that would benefit from further percolation in the lower courts prior to this Court's intervention."
asserted
that → exist → intervention
That statement, which was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, came in response to a petition from Vicki Baker, an innocent Texas woman whose house was blown up by law enforcement as they also attempted to coax out a suspect.
asserted
they → join → suspect
She would go on to be one of the luckier ones, ultimately succeeding under the Texas Constitution just this year, six years after the raid occurred.
asserted
raid → go → Constitution
The Aporia
