On April 23, 2002, in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency,¹ the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a regulatory taking claim based on a nearly three-year moratorium on development in the Lake Tahoe Basin. The Court split 6 to 3, with Justice John Paul Stevens writing the decision for the Court, and Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissenting. The decision is the first clear-cut victory for the government side in a land use or environmental takings case before the high court in 15 years.²

Apart from the unusual result, the decision is significant because the Court actually resolved several important legal issues. Many of the Court's recent takings cases have produced fractured majorities,³ or narrow holdings that avoided deciding any fundamental legal question.⁴ In Tahoe-Sierra, a strong majority issued several clear and important rulings, and in the main these rulings are highly favorable to government defendants.