Does the government violate the Due Process or Takings Clause by denying just compensation to property owners who miss a narrow and premature window to preserve their right to just compensation?

The Manistee County Treasurer foreclosed and sold Chelsea Koetter’s home for $106,000 to collect $3,863.40 in taxes, interest, and fees. The Takings Clause requires the government to return the surplus the sale to avoid an unconstitutional taking. Tyler v. Hennepin Cnty. , 598 U.S. 631 (2023). But the County kept it all pursuant to Mich. Comp. Laws § 211.78t, which gives the proceeds to the County if, weeks before the sale, the property owner fails to properly notify the government of her desire to be paid for her property. Federal and state courts in Michigan allow this end-run around Tyler based on dicta in Nelson v. City of New York , 352 U.S. 103 (1956). As a result, only about 5% of Michigan tax debtors successfully navigate the statute’s procedures. The statute violates due process and flouts the government’s “constitutional duty” to make “reasonable, certain, and adequate provision for obtaining compensation.” Cherokee Nation v. S. Kan. Ry. Co. , 135 U.S. 641, 658 (1890). The questions presented are: 1. Does the government violate the Due Process or Takings Clause by denying just compensation to property owners who miss a narrow and premature window to preserve their right to just compensation? 2. To the extent it authorizes Michigan’s confiscatory claim statute, should the Court overrule Nelson v. City of New York ?