Date: September 23, 2013 Last Edit: November 09, 2016

Related Content: Legal - Cases Legal

Kagan v. New Orleans – Free Speech Rights
U.S. Supreme Court – cert petition

City of New Orleans requires tour guides to obtain a license when speaking on
points of interest in the city. We argue that this constitutes a subject matter
restriction, which is reviewed under strict scrutiny. Since the licensing
requirement only applies when individuals charge a fee for speaking on points
of interest in the city, the Legal Center’s brief argues that the City is
improperly treating commercial actors as second-class citizens—with lesser free
speech rights than ordinary citizens. Accordingly, our brief encourages the
Supreme Court to take the case because individuals to not surrender their
constitutional rights upon going into business.

Kent Recycling v. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Reform
U.S. Supreme Court – cert petition

In this case the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal held that a
landowner does not have standing to pursue a challenge Army Corps or EPA’s
assertion of Clean Water Act jurisdiction over their property. Specifically,
the Court held that the only way to bring such a challenge a CWA jurisdictional
determination is to either (a) apply for a permit that the owner does not
believe is needed, and to appeal a denial of that application; or (b) proceed
with development plans without a permit, at which point the owner could raise a
jurisdictional challenge as an affirmative defense to a federal enforcement
action. In our amicus brief, we urge the Supreme Court to take the case because
small business owners have a right to challenge any final agency action that
has an immediate affect on the business’ rights. As we argue, a decision to
assert CWA jurisdiction over a specific property has immediate consequences
because it means the owner cannot make any use of the property without
obtaining a costly permit.

South LaFourche Levee Dist.
v. Jarreau
– Legal Reform
Louisiana Supreme Court

In this case a Louisiana Levee
District issued an order prohibiting a landowner from excavating dirt from his
property. This necessarily interfered with his excavation business and resulted
not only in depreciation in value to the surface value of the land, but in the
loss of value to the dirt that the owner would have otherwise sold.
Accordingly, the owner maintains that he should be compensated for both the
surface value and the value of that soil. In response, the Levee District
argues that it is never acceptable to compensate a landowner for lost revenue
resulting from the exercise of eminent domain. As amicus, NFIB joined with
Pacific Legal Foundation in arguing that full and fair compensation requires
the District to pay for everything that it has taken—including the value of the

Status: PENDING. Amicus brief filed 9/29/16.

you have a case that impacts small business, please contact us at
1-800-552-NFIB or email us at legalcenter@nfib.org as we are actively looking
for opportunities to weigh in on important issues in this state. NFIB Small
Business Legal Center is involved in many cases that impact this state and
others; to see our complete list of Supreme Court cases click on Washington, DC
on the interactive map.


Related Content: Legal - Cases | Legal

Subscribe For Free News And Tips

Enter your email to get FREE small business insights. Learn more

Get to know NFIB

NFIB is America's leading small business association, promoting and protecting the right of our members to own, operate and grow their business

Find out more about
NFIB Membership

Or call us today



State Issues

Choose Your State


YEF Foundation Research Foundation Legal Foundation

Member Benefits