Beta The Briev beta is out. Free on iPhone via TestFlight — install it in under a minute.

Join the beta ↗
Briev
Live
Crime & Justice

Supreme Court Faces Question of Whether Police Actions Trigger Fifth Amendment Takings

A petition to the Supreme Court challenges whether damage caused by LAPD SWAT operations to a print shop constitutes a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment.

In 2022, a SWAT team entered Carlos Pena's print shop in Los Angeles, deploying tear gas and pepper spray while pursuing an armed fugitive, causing extensive property damage. Pena filed a federal suit claiming the city’s actions amounted to a Fifth Amendment taking that requires just compensation. District Judge John Walter dismissed the case, reasoning that police power shields such damage, a view supported by past rulings.

The Ninth Circuit panel overturned that decision, invoking a historical “necessity” privilege that once allowed wartime property seizures without compensation. The panel’s majority linked that doctrine to modern police operations, while Judge Michelle Friedland dissented, warning against extending wartime logic to civilian law enforcement. The Supreme Court is set to review the case, which could redefine the scope of the Takings Clause for police conduct nationwide.

Why it matters

The ruling could determine whether cities must pay citizens when police actions destroy private property.

In this story

Takings Clausepolice powerSWAT teamnecessity defenseproperty damageSupreme Court reviewcivilian policingconstitutional law
Get the beta ↗