Case: Amy Hadley v. City of South Bend, Indiana, et al., No. 25-1158
Lower Court: Seventh Circuit
Docketed: 2026-04-08
Status: Pending
Question Presented: 1. Whether the Takings Clause has a police power exception, making no compensation due when the government damages private property under its police power outside of eminent domain (as the Seventh, Tenth, and Federal Circuits hold)—or not (as the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits hold).
2. Whether the government is exempt from liability under the Takings Clause when law enforcement officers intentionally destroy an innocent person’s property while trying to apprehend a fugitive.
On April 6, 2026, petitioner Amy Hadley filed a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the Supreme Court to resolve a longstanding circuit split over whether the Takings Clause requires just compensation when law enforcement intentionally damages private property in the course of exercising police power. The petition arrives after Justice Barrett granted an extension through April 6, giving counsel additional time to prepare the filing.
The underlying dispute arose when South Bend law enforcement officers allegedly destroyed Hadley’s property while attempting to apprehend a fugitive. The Seventh Circuit ruled against Hadley, holding that the Takings Clause does not require compensation for property damage caused through the exercise of police power. That decision aligned the Seventh Circuit with the Tenth and Federal Circuits, which recognize a police power exception to the Takings Clause.
The petition, prepared by attorneys including Patrick Michael Jaicomo and Jeffrey Hallett Redfern, frames the issue as a clean seven-circuit split. Four circuits, including the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eleventh, hold that no such exception exists. The Court has not directly resolved this question, and the split has persisted for years. The response deadline of May 8, 2026 will indicate whether the City contests certiorari or waives response.
The case carries real consequences for property owners who suffer losses at the hands of law enforcement without any wrongdoing on their part. If the Court grants certiorari, it will need to determine whether the Fifth Amendment’s just compensation requirement applies uniformly or yields whenever the government acts under its general police authority.