Document Type


Publication Date



The Supreme Court held in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. that challenges to the validity of land use regulations for failing to advance governmental interests must be brought under the Due Process Clause, rather than the Takings Clause, and must be evaluated under a deferential standard. This Article analyzes and evaluates the probable course of such judicial review, and concludes that federal courts will resist due process review of land use decisions for good reasons but not always with an adequate doctrinal explanation. However, state courts can use due process review to provide state level supervision of local land use decisions in the absence of other legislative or administrative checks on local discretion. Such judicial review should focus on decisions reflecting distortions in the local political process.


Copyright 2007 by the Regents of the University of California. Reprinted from Ecology Law Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 2, by permission of the Regents of the University of California.

Publication Citation

34 Ecology L.Q. 471-492 (2007)