Amicus Brief: Benedetti v. Marin County

Arron and Arthur Benedetti inherited two contiguous parcels of agriculturally zoned property in Marin County from their father, who was a long-time turkey farmer. Arron lives in an existing home on one parcel, and Arthur now wishes to build a residence on the neighboring parcel. But constructing a single-family residence triggers an extraordinary burden: the land has to always be a farm. Either they have to farm it, or they have to contract to a third party who will use it as a farm.

No court in American history has upheld a land‑use regulation that mandates a specific commercial occupation for landowners as a permitting condition. The court of appeals upheld the restriction with a decision that has no clear limiting principle: if affirmed, it would allow governments to condition development permits on participation in any occupation they deem socially or economically desirable.

Now on petition for Supreme Court review, the Manhattan Institute has joined the National Association of Realtors, Realtors Land Institute, the National Association of Home Builders, the California Farm Bureau Federation, and YIMBY law on a brief supporting review. We argue that this unique land-use restriction is an unconstitutional abridgement of property rights. The county is violating many Supreme Court precedents, and it is contributing to the housing shortage. Local officials shouldn't be able to use such permitting restrictions to mandate how land should be used.

Ilya Shapiro is a senior fellow and director of Constitutional Studies at the Manhattan Institute. Follow him on Twitter here.

Trevor Burrus is a legal policy fellow at the Manhattan Institute.