Buckeye Reporter

The Buckeye Institute has joined the Institute for Justice in submitting an amicus brief to the Ohio Supreme Court, urging the court to overturn zoning restrictions imposed by the city of Kent. The case, Havel v. Board of Zoning Appeals, Kent, Ohio, centers on property owners' rights and whether municipal zoning laws can restrict those rights.

David C. Tryon, director of litigation at The Buckeye Institute, stated, “The Ohio Supreme Court has clearly ruled that private property rights are fundamental rights deserving of meaningful protection by Ohio courts. Among these rights is the right to lease one’s property, and this case presents the court with the opportunity to protect property owners from overzealous governments seeking to impose unconstitutional zoning restrictions.”

In their filing, The Buckeye Institute and the Institute for Justice referenced several legal precedents such as Norwood v. Horney. They argued that private property rights should be subject to thorough judicial review if restricted by government action. According to their brief: Norwood’s “command that Ohio courts must provide meaningful protection for fundamental private property rights is more broadly relevant and applies here.” They also stated that “the right to lease property is well-recognized and deeply rooted in the country’s history,” while describing zoning as a modern development in land use regulation. The brief continues: “[W]hether viewed as a right to establish one’s household or the right to lease property, the rights at issue here are well-recognized property rights. And those rights should be protected against interference in the name of zoning.”

The organizations’ arguments reflect ongoing debates over local control versus individual ownership in real estate law.