Supreme Court of the United States
526 U.S. 687 (1999)
Land use decisions are not immune from judicial scrutiny. There must be an opportunity for review by a court.
Damages for a constitutional violation are a legal remedy. Just compensation is a compensatory remedy. In determining just compensation, the question is not what the taker gained, but what the property owner lost.
When the government condemns property for public use, it must provide the landowner a forum or process to seek just compensation, as required by the Constitution. If the condemnation process provides just compensation to the property owner, the governmental actions are not unlawful or unconstitutional.
Even if compensation proceedings are not initiated, there is no constitutional violation or injury unless the government fails to provide an adequate remedy for the post-deprivation loss of property value.
Because regulatory takings cases depend upon the particular facts and circumstances of each case, the question is appropriate for a jury.