Supreme Court Issues 9-0 Decision

[BOP]

This is a video about a guy in California who went to put a pre-man home on a piece of land he bought - and was charged $23,000 on top of everything else for a "traffic impact fee." The man, a former builder paid, under protest, but made a federal case out of it. The fact that it was a 9-0 decision was what caught my eye.

I'll put up another post with a link to a very readable text version of what happened, which I think is what this guy took his text from.

 

[BOP]

Here's the text version in more-or-less plain English.

Sheetz v. County of El Dorado

The government can’t hold the right to use your property hostage in order to extract exorbitant fees. That’s akin to extortion.

pacificlegal.org

CASE STORY

George Sheetz built a career and livelihood as an engineering contractor and consultant in Northern California. In 2016, he began preparing for retirement and bought a vacant lot in rural El Dorado County for a small, manufactured home where he and his wife would live and raise their grandson.

He got his home, but it came with permit fees so exorbitant, he made a federal case out of it—a case that went the Supreme Court of the United States.

George knows the ropes and red tape involved in new construction, and he figured the process would be easier for a manufactured home because it’s already built and had passed necessary government inspections.

Once his land was ready and all George needed was a county building permit, he was stunned when told he could have his permit, but only if he paid a so-called traffic impact fee of more than $23,000.

 

[GURPS]

 

[Tilted]

This is a video about a guy in California who went to put a pre-man home on a piece of land he bought - and was charged $23,000 on top of everything else for a "traffic impact fee." The man, a former builder paid, under protest, but made a federal case out of it. The fact that it was a 9-0 decision was what caught my eye.

I'll put up another post with a link to a very readable text version of what happened, which I think is what this guy took his text from.

9-0 is the most common vote split for Supreme Court decisions. Typically for a given Supreme Court term something in the ballpark of 40% of decided cases will be unanimous on the judgment. Cases decided this early in the term are probably even more likely to be unanimous.

 

[BOP]

9-0 is the most common vote split for Supreme Court decisions. Typically for a given Supreme Court term something in the ballpark of 40% of decided cases will be unanimous on the judgment. Cases decided this early in the term are probably even more likely to be unanimous.

Thanks, I did not realize that. The general impression one gets from the media is that all decisions are contentious, split along partisan lines.

 

[Tilted]

Thanks, I did not realize that. The general impression one gets from the media is that all decisions are contentious, split along partisan lines.

You're welcome.

Yeah, I get that. The cases which are decided 9-0 tend to be less controversial, or otherwise relate to issues fewer people care about, so they tend to get less attention. So it isn't surprising if a lot of people think most cases are decided 5-4 or 6-3. I'd also say that even among the cases with split votes, I think a lot of people would be surprised by how often we get ideologically mixed alignments. Conservative or liberal, the Justices have more nuanced views when it comes to specific issues and we often get what many would consider unusual vote mixes.