skip to main content

H.R. 2372 (106th): Private Property Rights Implementation Act of 2000


The text of the bill below is as of Jun 29, 1999 (Introduced).


HR 2372 IH

106th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2372

To simplify and expedite access to the Federal courts for injured parties whose rights and privileges, secured by the United States Constitution, have been deprived by final actions of Federal agencies, or other government officials or entities acting under color of State law; to prevent Federal courts from abstaining from exercising Federal jurisdiction in actions where no State law claim is alleged; to permit certification of unsettled State law questions that are essential to resolving Federal claims arising under the Constitution; and to clarify when government action is sufficiently final to ripen certain Federal claims arising under the Constitution.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 29, 1999

Mr. CANADY of Florida (for himself, Mr. FROST, Mr. DOOLEY of California, Mr. GOODE, Mr. BISHOP, Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Mr. WALSH, Mr. BARCIA, and Mr. BURTON of Indiana) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


A BILL

To simplify and expedite access to the Federal courts for injured parties whose rights and privileges, secured by the United States Constitution, have been deprived by final actions of Federal agencies, or other government officials or entities acting under color of State law; to prevent Federal courts from abstaining from exercising Federal jurisdiction in actions where no State law claim is alleged; to permit certification of unsettled State law questions that are essential to resolving Federal claims arising under the Constitution; and to clarify when government action is sufficiently final to ripen certain Federal claims arising under the Constitution.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ‘Private Property Rights Implementation Act of 1999’.

SEC. 2. JURISDICTION IN CIVIL RIGHTS CASES.

    Section 1343 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

    ‘(c) Whenever a district court exercises jurisdiction under subsection (a) in an action in which the operative facts concern the uses of real property, it shall not abstain from exercising or relinquish its jurisdiction to a State court in an action in which no claim of a violation of a State law, right, or privilege is alleged, if a parallel proceeding in State court arising out of the same operative facts as the district court proceeding is not pending.

    ‘(d) If the district court has jurisdiction over an action under subsection (a) in which the operative facts concern the uses of real property and which cannot be decided without resolution of an unsettled question of State law, the district court may certify the question of State law to the highest appellate court of that State. After the State appellate court resolves the question certified to it, the district court shall proceed with resolving the merits. The district court shall not certify a question of State law under this subsection unless the question of State law--

      ‘(1) will significantly affect the merits of the injured party’s Federal claim; and

      ‘(2) is patently unclear.

    ‘(e)(1) Any claim or action brought under section 1979 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1983) to redress the deprivation of a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution shall be ripe for adjudication by the district courts upon a final decision rendered by any person acting under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or territory of the United States, that causes actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress.

    ‘(2)(A) For purposes of this subsection, a final decision exists if--

      ‘(i) any person acting under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or territory of the United States, makes a definitive decision regarding the extent of permissible uses on the property that has been allegedly infringed or taken;

      ‘(ii)(I) one meaningful application, as defined by the locality concerned within that State or territory, to use the property has been submitted but has not been approved, and the party seeking redress has applied for one appeal or waiver which has not been approved, in a case in which the applicable statute, ordinance, custom, or usage provides a mechanism for appeal to or waiver by an administrative agency; or

      ‘(II) one meaningful application, as defined by the locality concerned within that State or territory, to use the property has been submitted but has not been approved, the disapproval explains in writing the use, density, or intensity of development of the property that would be approved, with any conditions therefor, and the party seeking redress has resubmitted another meaningful application taking into account the terms of the disapproval, except that--

        ‘(aa) if no such reapplication is submitted, then a final decision shall not have been reached for purposes of this subsection, except as provided in subparagraph (B); and

        ‘(bb) if the reapplication is not approved, or if the reapplication is not required under subparagraph (B), then a final decision exists for purposes of this subsection if the party seeking redress has applied for one appeal or

waiver with respect to the disapproval, which has not been approved, in a case in which the applicable statute, ordinance, custom, or usage provides a mechanism of appeal or waiver by an administrative agency; and

      ‘(iii) in a case involving the uses of real property, if the applicable statute or ordinance provides for review of the case by elected officials, the party seeking redress has applied for but is denied such review.

    ‘(B) The party seeking redress shall not be required to apply for an appeal or waiver described in subparagraph (A) if no such appeal or waiver is available, if it cannot provide the relief requested, or if the application or reapplication would be futile.

    ‘(3) For purposes of this subsection, a final decision shall not require the party seeking redress to exhaust judicial remedies provided by any State or territory of the United States.

    ‘(f) Nothing in subsection (c), (d), or (e) alters the substantive law of takings of property, including the burden of proof borne by the plaintiff.’.

SEC. 3. UNITED STATES AS DEFENDANT.

    Section 1346 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

    ‘(h)(1) Any claim brought under subsection (a) that is founded upon a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution, but was allegedly infringed or taken by the United States, shall be ripe for adjudication upon a final decision rendered by the United States, that causes actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress.

    ‘(2) For purposes of this subsection, a final decision exists if--

      ‘(A) the United States makes a definitive decision regarding the extent of permissible uses on the property that has been allegedly infringed or taken; and

      ‘(B) one meaningful application to use the property has been submitted but has not been approved, and the party seeking redress has applied for one appeal or waiver which has not been approved, in a case in which the applicable law of the United States provides a mechanism for appeal to or waiver by an administrative agency.

    The party seeking redress shall not be required to apply for an appeal or waiver described in subparagraph (B) if no such appeal or waiver is available, if it cannot provide the relief requested, or if application or reapplication to use the property would be futile.

    ‘(3) Nothing in this subsection alters the substantive law of takings of property, including the burden of proof borne by the plaintiff.’.

SEC. 4. JURISDICTION OF COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS.

    Section 1491(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

    ‘(3) Any claim brought under this subsection founded upon a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution, but allegedly infringed or taken by the United States, shall be ripe for adjudication upon a final decision rendered by the United States, that causes actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress. For purposes of this paragraph, a final decision exists if--

      ‘(A) the United States makes a definitive decision regarding the extent of permissible uses on the property that has been allegedly infringed or taken; and

      ‘(B) one meaningful application to use the property has been submitted but has not been approved, and the party seeking redress has applied for one appeal or waiver which has not been approved, in a case in which the applicable law of the United States provides a mechanism for appeal or waiver.

    The party seeking redress shall not be required to apply for an appeal or waiver described in subparagraph (B) if no such appeal or waiver is available, if it cannot provide the relief requested, or if application or reapplication to use the property would be futile. Nothing in this paragraph alters the substantive law of takings of property, including the burden of proof borne by the plaintiff.’.

SEC. 5. DUTY OF NOTICE TO OWNERS.

    Whenever a Federal agency takes an agency action limiting the use of private property that may be affected by the amendments made by this Act, the agency shall give notice to the owners of that property explaining their rights under such amendments and the procedures for obtaining any compensation that may be due to them under such amendments.

SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply to actions commenced on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.