A husband and wife in Idaho were horrified after they bought a lot in a subdivision and began clearing it to build a home -- only to be ordered by the Environmental Protection Agency to stop their work and "restore" the land because part of it supposedly was wetlands. They were told they couldn't even seek a permit to build for three years, and they faced fines of nearly $38,000 per day if they didn't obey the federal order. Furthermore, they were denied a hearing on the EPA order.
But the couple, Mike and Chantell Sackett, have won a partial victory for themselves and for property rights, from the U.S. Supreme Court. The court unanimously ruled they are entitled to a hearing to challenge the threat of such massive fines.
Still unresolved is the issue of government in effect seizing private property without compensation. The Fifth Amendment states, "[N]or shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
While the land in question technically remains the Sacketts' property, the EPA is, for all practical purposes, denying them the benefit of that ownership. Unless the land was plainly designated as wetlands before the Sacketts bought it, it seems extremely unjust that they are now forbidden to build -- essentially forfeiting their investment.
Whether they'll get "just compensation" for their loss is sadly unclear.