The Washington Report

The National Association of REALTORS® (NAR), joined by a coalition of industry partners, filed a dual-header amicus brief supporting Supreme Court review in Walls v. Montgomery County and Tedford's Tenancy, LLC v. City of New York. Both cases center on the legal doctrine of ripeness and when property owners may bring constitutional takings claims before a court. 

Ripeness is a legal doctrine that determines whether a dispute is ready for judicial review. In property rights cases, courts often require property owners to obtain a final decision from the government before pursuing a takings claim. These cases ask whether property owners who have already suffered a concrete injury must continue pursuing other administrative remedies or procedures before they can access the courts. 

In Walls, a Maryland property owner spent decades holding land for a future homesite and invested nearly $40,000 obtaining permits and approvals. After receiving county approvals, he was denied permission to install the well and septic system necessary to make the property buildable. Although county officials had already indicated such requests would be denied, the courts dismissed his takings claim as unripe, concluding he first had to pursue additional procedures, including seeking a legislative amendment to the county's water and sewer plan, a process that could take years and still provide no guarantee of relief. 

In Tedford's Tenancy, the owners of a rent-regulated Manhattan apartment building allege New York City's rent stabilization regime has deprived the property of economically viable use, leaving the building operating at a loss and facing substantial repair costs. Rather than addressing the merits of the claim, the courts held that the owners must first pursue additional administrative remedies, despite arguments that those procedures could not meaningfully address the financial harm already suffered. 

NAR's brief argues that property owners should not be required to navigate endless and potentially futile rounds of permitting, appeals, or other government procedures before gaining access to the courts. The brief also emphasizes the broader consequences of permitting delays, noting that prolonged approval processes increase development costs, discourage new housing construction, and further constrain housing supply. NAR and its coalition partners urge the Supreme Court to establish clearer standards that ensure property owners can obtain timely judicial review when government actions effectively prevent the reasonable use and development of their property. 

NAR’s legal advocacy efforts to support private property rights remain a priority. NAR will continue to monitor any developments in this case and provide updates accordingly. 

NAR's Fall 2026 legislative priorities include two key insurance issues: long-term reauthorization of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) Program.

NAR is providing talking points and supporting materials for member meetings with Congress during the August recess and throughout the fall.  In those materials, NAR urges Congress to reauthorize both programs to help maintain insurance availability and provide certainty for real estate markets.

Members can access NAR's legislative priorities materials, including a one-page summary and more detailed talking points document, at the links below.

• NAR Fall 2026 Legislative Priorities
• One-Page Summary
• Detailed Talking Points