IIB
106TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 2372
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
MARCH 20, 2000
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
AN ACT
To simplify and expedite access to the Federal courts for
injured parties whose rights and privileges, secured by
the United States Constitution, have been deprived by
final actions of Federal agencies, or other government
officials or entities acting under color of State law; to
prevent Federal courts from abstaining from exercising
Federal jurisdiction in actions where no State law claim
HR 2372 RFS
is alleged; to permit certification of unsettled State law
questions that are essential to resolving Federal claims
arising under the Constitution; and to clarify when gov-
ernment action is sufficiently final to ripen certain Fed-
eral claims arising under the Constitution.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Private Property
Rights Implementation Act of 2000’’.
SEC. 2. JURISDICTION IN CIVIL RIGHTS CASES.
Section 1343 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(c) Whenever a district court exercises jurisdiction
under subsection (a) in an action in which the operative
facts concern the uses of real property, it shall not abstain
from exercising or relinquish its jurisdiction to a State
court in an action in which no claim of a violation of a
State law, right, or privilege is alleged, if a parallel pro-
ceeding in State court arising out of the same operative
facts as the district court proceeding is not pending.
‘‘(d) If the district court has jurisdiction over an ac-
tion under subsection (a) in which the operative facts con-
cern the uses of real property and which cannot be decided
without resolution of an unsettled question of State law,
the district court may certify the question of State law
HR 2372 RFS
to the highest appellate court of that State. After the
State appellate court resolves the question certified to it,
the district court shall proceed with resolving the merits.
The district court shall not certify a question of State law
under this subsection unless the question of State law—
‘‘(1) will significantly affect the merits of the
injured party’s Federal claim; and
‘‘(2) is patently unclear.
‘‘(e)(1) Any claim or action brought under section
1979 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42
U.S.C. 1983) to redress the deprivation of a property right
or privilege secured by the Constitution shall be ripe for
adjudication by the district courts upon a final decision
rendered by any person acting under color of any statute,
ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or
territory of the United States, that causes actual and con-
crete injury to the party seeking redress.
‘‘(2)(A) For purposes of this subsection, a final deci-
sion exists if—
‘‘(i) any person acting under color of any stat-
ute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any
State or territory of the United States, makes a de-
finitive decision, as described in clauses (ii) and (iii),
regarding the extent of permissible uses on the prop-
erty that has been allegedly infringed or taken;
HR 2372 RFS
‘‘(ii)(I) one meaningful application, as defined
by applicable law, to use the property has been sub-
mitted but has been disapproved without a written
explanation as described in subclause (II), and the
party seeking redress has applied for one appeal and
one waiver which has been disapproved, in a case in
which the applicable statute, ordinance, custom, or
usage provides a mechanism for appeal to or waiver
by an administrative agency; or
‘‘(II) one meaningful application, as defined by
applicable law, to use the property has been sub-
mitted but has been disapproved, and the dis-
approval explains in writing the use, density, or in-
tensity of development of the property that would be
approved, with any conditions therefor, and the
party seeking redress has resubmitted another
meaningful application taking into account the terms
of the disapproval, except that—
‘‘(aa) if no such reapplication is submitted,
then a final decision shall not have been
reached for purposes of this subsection, except
as provided in subparagraph (B); and
‘‘(bb) if the reapplication is disapproved, or
if the reapplication is not required under sub-
paragraph (B), then a final decision exists for
HR 2372 RFS
purposes of this subsection if the party seeking
redress has applied for one appeal and one
waiver with respect to the disapproval, which
has been disapproved, in a case in which the
applicable statute, ordinance, custom, or usage
provides a mechanism of appeal to or waiver by
an administrative agency; and
‘‘(iii) if the applicable statute or ordinance pro-
vides for review of the case by elected officials, the
party seeking redress has applied for but is denied
such review, or is allowed such review and the mean-
ingful application is disapproved.
‘‘(B) The party seeking redress shall not be required
to apply for an appeal or waiver described in subparagraph
(A) if no such appeal or waiver is available, if it cannot
provide the relief requested, or if the application or re-
application would be futile.
‘‘(3) For purposes of clauses (ii) and (iii) of para-
graph (2), the failure to act within a reasonable time on
any application, reapplication, appeal, waiver, or review of
the case shall constitute a disapproval.
‘‘(4) For purposes of this subsection, a case is ripe
for adjudication even if the party seeking redress does not
exhaust judicial remedies provided by any State or terri-
tory of the United States.
HR 2372 RFS
‘‘(f) Nothing in subsection (c), (d), or (e) alters the
substantive law of takings of property, including the bur-
den of proof borne by the plaintiff.’’.
SEC. 3. UNITED STATES AS DEFENDANT.
Section 1346 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(h)(1) Any claim brought under subsection (a) that
is founded upon a property right or privilege secured by
the Constitution, but was allegedly infringed or taken by
the United States, shall be ripe for adjudication upon a
final decision rendered by the United States, that causes
actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress.
‘‘(2) For purposes of this subsection, a final decision
exists if—
‘‘(A) the United States makes a definitive deci-
sion, as defined in subparagraph (B), regarding the
extent of permissible uses on the property that has
been allegedly infringed or taken; and
‘‘(B) one meaningful application, as defined by
applicable law, to use the property has been sub-
mitted but has been disapproved, and the party
seeking redress has applied for one appeal or waiver
which has been disapproved, in a case in which the
applicable law of the United States provides a mech-
HR 2372 RFS
anism for appeal to or waiver by an administrative
agency.
The party seeking redress shall not be required to apply
for an appeal or waiver described in subparagraph (B) if
no such appeal or waiver is available, if it cannot provide
the relief requested, or if application or reapplication to
use the property would be futile.
‘‘(3) For purposes of paragraph (2), the United
States’ failure to act within a reasonable time on any ap-
plication, appeal, or waiver shall constitute a disapproval.
‘‘(4) Nothing in this subsection alters the substantive
law of takings of property, including the burden of proof
borne by the plaintiff.’’.
SEC. 4. JURISDICTION OF COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS.
Section 1491(a) of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(3) Any claim brought under this subsection found-
ed upon a property right or privilege secured by the Con-
stitution, but allegedly infringed or taken by the United
States, shall be ripe for adjudication upon a final decision
rendered by the United States, that causes actual and con-
crete injury to the party seeking redress. For purposes of
this paragraph, a final decision exists if—
‘‘(A) the United States makes a definitive deci-
sion, as described in subparagraph (B), regarding
HR 2372 RFS
the extent of permissible uses on the property that
has been allegedly infringed or taken; and
‘‘(B) one meaningful application, as defined by
applicable law, to use the property has been sub-
mitted but has been disapproved, and the party
seeking redress has applied for one appeal or waiver
which has been disapproved, in a case in which the
applicable law of the United States provides a mech-
anism for appeal or waiver.
The party seeking redress shall not be required to apply
for an appeal or waiver described in subparagraph (B) if
no such appeal or waiver is available, if it cannot provide
the relief requested, or if application or reapplication to
use the property would be futile. For purposes of subpara-
graph (B), the United States’ failure to act within a rea-
sonable time on any application, appeal, or waiver shall
constitute a disapproval. Nothing in this paragraph alters
the substantive law of takings of property, including the
burden of proof borne by the plaintiff.’’.
SEC. 5. DUTY OF NOTICE TO OWNERS.
Whenever a Federal agency takes an agency action
limiting the use of private property that may be affected
by the amendments made by this Act, the agency shall,
not later than 30 days after the agency takes that action,
give notice to the owners of that property explaining their
HR 2372 RFS
rights under such amendments and the procedures for ob-
taining any compensation that may be due to them under
such amendments.
SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The amendments made by this Act shall apply to ac-
tions commenced on or after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
Passed the House of Representatives March 16,
2000.
Attest:
JEFF TRANDAHL,
Clerk.
By MARTHA C. MORRISON,
Deputy Clerk.