Lawrence G. Sager

Burnt Bridges: Retreat of the Federal Judiciary from Land Use Litigation

Abstract The decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Petaluma, despite its obvious and substantial reliance on the requirements of standing to sue, tempts the commentator to leap to a discussion of the merits. After the District Courts decision, many of us watched the case closely, either hoping or fearing that it would become the tock to the tick of Golden v. Planning Board of Town of Ramapo,1 establishing some limitations to the license of communities to define themselves and their growth at the expense of excluded nonresidents. The unanimous opinion by the Ninth Circuit panel bristles with hostility to the right-to-travel rationale of the District Court and invites comment on this level.