Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
Citation: 505 U.S. 1003 (U.S. 1992)
Facts
David Lucas paid $975,000 for two residential beachfront lots in South Carolina, intending to build houses. Two years later, South Carolina enacted the Beachfront Management Act, which barred Lucas from constructing any permanent habitable structures on the lots. The state trial court found the regulation rendered the lots valueless and awarded Lucas compensation; the South Carolina Supreme Court reversed, holding no compensation was owed.
Issue
When a regulation deprives a landowner of all economically beneficial use of property, is the government required to pay just compensation without regard to whether the regulation substantially advances a legitimate state interest?
Holding
The U.S. Supreme Court (Scalia, J.) held that when a regulation deprives an owner of all economically beneficial use of land, a categorical taking has occurred requiring just compensation — unless the prohibited uses were already unlawful under the state’s background principles of property and nuisance law.
Rule
Per se regulatory taking (total wipeout rule): a regulation that destroys all economic value of property is a categorical taking requiring just compensation, except where the restriction duplicates what background principles of the state’s law of property and nuisance would independently prohibit.
Significance
Lucas creates a categorical bright-line rule for the “total wipeout” scenario, complementing Penn Central’s ad hoc balancing test for partial value diminutions. The decision establishes the “background principles” exception, which lower courts have wrestled with ever since. Lucas is essential for understanding the outer limits of regulatory takings doctrine and the tension between environmental regulation and property rights.