Won’t happen, even with the current conservative leaning majority.
The Supreme Court has chipped away at property rights for decades, and according to the SC, city/county commissions have most of the power and legally the right to tell you what you can do with your property with some very limited exceptions.
Well, if a pig flies by he can have a ham sandwich on the fly. The Supreme Court is going to overturn public acccess to the coast like I’m going to eat a light bulb. Just not going to happen.
But that very principle could be dismantled in the latest chapter. . .
Good!
Intentionally, that very idea is an absurd invasion of property rights. You want to get to the beach? Great. Do what everyone else does. Make arrangements--of whatever kind--to whoever paid good money to own the valuable location you have decided you want to occupy.
Sound pretty cut and dry that when he “bought” the land, he bought only certain rights to the land. Seems that someone who had already owned the land when this Act was passed would have a good argument that the state had seized their property. Perhaps whoever sold him the land does. But when he bought the land, he knew (or should have known) that the state reserved access rights to the beach.
This is not uncommon. States, or other entities, typically reserve rights to water that falls on property, access to cables or pipes beneath land, access to airspace or even wiring above ground, even rights to transport cattle across the land.
Not directly related, but in Canada, anything below the high tide line (except that fronting leased piers/quays/waterfront and military) is considered public land, accessible to anyone that can get there without trespassing on surrounding properties.
On the other hand, it also seems that he could win on a much narrower interpretation than what the Surfer Association is claiming it must be decided on.
When SCOTUS reverses optics here will be heinous and the release of Little Pink House could not be more timely.
The result will be that millionaires have strong property rights and little people like Suzanne Kelo lose their homes. Disgusting.
They should argue that due to out of control man made Global Warming, all the Structures including any fences and gates need to be Torn Down to satisfy the Global Warming Gods before the Ocean swallows it all up from rising seas.
Big time Democrat donor. Born in India. Screws American workers at Sun Microsystems by abusing the H-1B visa program, now wants to cut Americans off from their own coastal border. F*ck him, hope he loses.
Public easements have been a recognized limit on property rights for hundreds of years going back to English common law.
I drove down to the beach 15 or so years ago when I was in Half Moon Bay for training. It was honestly one of the most beautiful places I’ve ever been. The beach was accessed by a small road that had a $5 toll sign painted on plywood. I noticed it as I was driving south on Rt1 exploring after class. It was the haphazard sign that caused me to turn around and go see what was at the end of the road. You gave the $5 down at the bottom. The beach was about a half mile long and rock bluffs went out into the ocean on both sides of the beach. I was the only person walking on the beach at the time, but I felt like I was being watched. I mean I literally felt eyes on me. That was when I noticed about a dozen sea lions bobbing in the surf about 50 feet out just staring at me. It was really cool experience.
Sheriff says- Martins Beach won’t be arrested ... go around gates locked by billionaire...
Silicon Valley billionaire fights to block the public from accessing the beach his $32m mansion [tr]
He purchased the property knowing all of the limitations. He can’t cry now. Besides, it is California - he loses.
If he loses all his property should be condemned and confiscated for public use.
Should have thought about that before he bought the property - fully knowing that no private citizen owns the ocean which extends to the high tide mark - seems that having 84 acres should offer plenty of privacy.