Mr. Speaker, first of all, we are told that this is a terrible situation because under current law, given Supreme Court decisions, you have to go to State court; you cannot adjudicate your Federal constitutional rights in Federal court. You can always appeal any final court State decision. If you claim that the Supreme Court of Tennessee has violated your Federal constitutional rights, you can always appeal that into the Federal courts. So no one is disputing that. So that is a bogus claim.

Secondly, of course, the bill does not say directly that the local government must pay anybody who is denied any opportunity to do anything; but it has that effect because, for example, the law does not carve out an exception from the fifth amendment. The fifth amendment applies to everything, but the courts have long held that if you have a 100-acre plot of land and 2 acres, let us say, are wetlands that you cannot develop and you can develop 98 of 100 acres, if you look at the property as a whole and there is no taking there.

What this bill says is if they say 2 acres are wetlands and you cannot build on it or after half an acre or 35 square feet, the local government must pay for that; and for that matter if the local government says that you can only build on half acre lots, you cannot fill up every inch, then you are not using every inch of your land, you are prevented, and that is a taking of property.

Basic law always has been understood that as long as you can substantially use your land, not every inch of it, not to the extent, that is not a taking.

This says it is a taking. So if New York City zoning says the you can only build 75 stories, you cannot build 300 stories, under this bill, the local government would have to pay for the value of the 225 stories that you cannot build. This is way beyond takings law, and that destroys all local regulations. That is why this bill should be defeated.