[April 1, 2026]: Today, Southeastern Legal Foundation (SLF) submitted an amicus brief urging the United States Supreme Court to once again take up the case of George Sheetz, a California man who was told by his county that before he could build a home on his own private property, he needed to pay $23,420 for road improvements that had absolutely no relationship to him or his property. For ten years now, Mr. Sheetz has been fighting government power grabs on his private property, and SLF is urging the Supreme Court to declare the county’s actions unconstitutional once and for all.

In the brief, SLF, Texas Public Policy Foundation, Manhattan Institute, and NFIB Small Business Legal Center explain that withholding building permits until a property owner agrees to pay a fee is unconstitutional, especially because the county did not show how building a home would have any impact on the roads around town.

This is the third time in three years that SLF is appearing before the Supreme Court as amicus in this case. First, Mr. Sheetz appealed prior court decisions that the permit condition on his property was somehow OK because it was issued through a law rather than through county administrators. With SLF’s amicus support, he won his case in 2024, when the Supreme Court unanimously held that he could challenge the permit law.

But when his case went back down to the lower courts, they held that even though he could challenge the law, the law was ultimately constitutional. Now, Mr. Sheetz is fighting for a final ruling that the law cannot stand, and SLF is urging the Supreme Court to once again take up his case and strike down the law once and for all.