HomeNewsSupreme Court Strikes Down Home Equity Theft by States

    Supreme Court Strikes Down Home Equity Theft by States

    Published on

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled that states cannot keep the surplus proceeds from the sale of properties seized for unpaid taxes, a practice known as home equity theft.

    Embed from Getty Images

    The case involved Geraldine Tyler, a 94-year-old woman who lost her Minneapolis condominium to Hennepin County in 2015 over $15,000 in taxes and fees. The county sold the property for $40,000 and kept the entire amount, leaving Tyler with nothing.

    Tyler sued the county, arguing that it violated the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause, which requires that the government pay just compensation when it takes private property for public use. She also claimed that the county’s action amounted to an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment.

    The Supreme Court agreed with Tyler on both counts, reversing a lower court ruling that dismissed her lawsuit. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion for the court, saying that taxpayers are only required to pay what they owe to the government, not more.

    “The taxpayer must render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s but no more,” Roberts wrote, quoting a passage from the Bible.

    The court also said that Tyler’s claim of an excessive fine was plausible, given that the county took more than twice as much as she owed. The court noted that the Eighth Amendment applies to state and local governments as well as the federal government.

    Tyler’s lawyer, Christina Martin of the Pacific Legal Foundation, hailed the decision as a victory for property rights and a blow to home equity theft.

    “This decision affirms that property rights are fundamental and don’t depend solely on state law. The court’s ruling makes clear that home equity theft is not only unjust, but unconstitutional,” Martin said.

    According to the foundation, a dozen states regularly allow governments to take more than they are owed in taxes and fees when they seize properties. Other states have laws that could permit the practice in some circumstances.

    The Supreme Court’s ruling could have implications for other cases involving property seizures by governments, such as civil asset forfeiture and eminent domain.


    • States Are Not Entitled to Windfalls in Tax Disputes, Supreme Court Rules | The New York Times | May 25, 2023
    • Supreme Court rules for homeowner in ‘equity theft’ dispute | NBC News | May 25, 2023
    • Supreme Court Hears Property Tax Home Equity Dispute | Kiplinger | April 27, 2023

    Leave a Reply

    Latest articles

    How the Heritage Foundation is preparing for a second Trump presidency

    The Heritage Foundation, a powerful conservative think tank based in Washington, has been ramping...

    U.S. Navy thwarts Iranian attempts to seize oil tankers in Gulf of Oman

    The U.S. Navy has intervened to stop Iranian Navy ships from seizing two oil...

    Melatonin Use in Children: A Growing Trend with Risks and Alternatives

    Melatonin, a hormone that helps regulate the sleep-wake cycle, is widely used by parents...

    Trainwreck: Woodstock ’99 – How a festival of peace and love turned into a disaster of violence and misogyny

    The Woodstock '69 festival is widely regarded as one of the most iconic and...

    More like this

    Popular Science Goes Digital: How a 151-Year-Old Publication Adapts to the Changing Media Landscape

    Popular Science, one of the oldest and most respected science and technology magazines in...

    Melatonin Use in Children: A Growing Trend with Risks and Alternatives

    Melatonin, a hormone that helps regulate the sleep-wake cycle, is widely used by parents...

    Saudi Arabia’s oil gamble: How the kingdom is trying to boost demand and avoid a bust

    Saudi Arabia, the world's top oil exporter, is reportedly planning to artificially boost oil...
    %d bloggers like this: