California Coastal Commission: Retroactivity of a Judicial Ruling of Unconstitutionality

By Grenfell, Kristin | Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, Fall 2003 | Go to article overview

California Coastal Commission: Retroactivity of a Judicial Ruling of Unconstitutionality


Grenfell, Kristin, Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum


I. INTRODUCTION

In January 2003, in Marine Forests Society v. California Coastal Commission, the California Court of Appeals ruled that the California Coastal Commission's appointment structure violates the California state constitution's separation of powers clause. (1) The plaintiff, Marine Forests Society (MFS), had built an experimental reef on the floor of the Newport Harbor. The California Coastal Commission (hereinafter "Commission") notified the MFS that it intended to commence cease and desist proceedings against it. The MFS brought suit to enjoin the Commission, arguing that the Commission's appointment structure was unconstitutional and therefore, that the Commission did not have the authority to issue the order. (2) The appellate court agreed with the MFS. On April 9, 2003, the Supreme Court of California agreed to review this case. (3) If the California Supreme Court upholds the ruling of unconstitutionality, it will then have to decide whether such a ruling will retroactively invalidate past and pending decisions of the Commission. (4) Such a retroactive application of a ruling of unconstitutionality would cause uncertainty and disarray for cities and property owners who have relied on Commission decisions over the past twenty-seven years.

The doctrine of retroactivity has gone through various incarnations at both the state and the federal levels over the past two hundred years, so it is not obvious which approach the court will use in this case. In addition to having a choice of approaches to retroactivity of judicial decisions, the court could choose to use the de facto officer doctrine and uphold past decisions of commissioners because they were de facto officers at the time they made the decisions. The purpose of this Note is to navigate the case law from California courts and from the United States Supreme Court in an attempt to determine whether the California Supreme Court will make retroactive a ruling of unconstitutionality in the MFS case.

This Note will first give a brief background on the Commission and the MFS case. It will then examine the history of the retroactivity and de facto officer doctrines at both the United States and California Supreme Court levels. Given the existing history of retroactivity, the Note will then explore the factors that the California Supreme Court will consider in reaching a decision, and the limiting effect of res judicata and statutes of limitations on retroactive decisions. Finally, the Note will examine whether the court would use the de facto officer. This Note concludes that if the California Supreme Court upholds the ruling of unconstitutionality, it will not invoke the de facto officer doctrine, but will choose instead to make its decision non-retroactive.

II. BACKGROUND

A. California Coastal Commission: History, Number and Importance of Decisions

The California Coastal Commission was first created by voter initiative in 1972 (5) and later made permanent by the California Coastal Act of 1976. (6) The Commission's duties include reviewing and certifying the programs of local governments for compliance with the Coastal Act, granting and denying permits for development, requiring property owners to offer easements for public beach access, and issuing cease and desist orders. (7) In its twenty-seven years, the Commission has made over 100,000 decisions relating to development permits. (8) As of October 1, 2003, there were twenty-three appeals of Commission decisions pending review in trial and appellate courts in California. (9) Several of the cases pending before the trial courts were brought after the appellate court's decision in Marine Forests Society but involve appeals of offers to dedicate that were finalized many years ago. (10) These decisions will be blocked by the Coastal Act's statute of limitations. Only two cases currently pending reached the appeals court before Marine Forests Society was decided. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • A full archive of books and articles related to this one
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

California Coastal Commission: Retroactivity of a Judicial Ruling of Unconstitutionality
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

    Already a member? Log in now.