Opinion ID: 2585381
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 24

Heading: Due Process Distinguished

Text: I do not see substantive due process as adding anything to our understanding about what is or is not a taking, although it is no doubt true, as the majority says, the doctrines have indeed been conflated and confused from time to time. Rather, we have recognized the criteria to establish a taking are `quite different' from that required to establish a due process violation. Mission Springs, 134 Wash.2d at 964, 954 P.2d 250 (quoting Nollan, 483 U.S. at 835 n. 3, 107 S.Ct. 3141). I therefore emphatically agree with the majority's conclusion that [t]he instant case falls within the rule that would generally find a taking where a regulation deprives the owner of a fundamental attribute of property ownership, Majority at 194, and see that as the dispositive feature of the majority's analysis.