Federal Appeals Courts Issue Key Rulings on Eminent Domain, Second Amendment, and Fourth Amendment Violations

The latest edition of Short Circuit, a weekly feature by the Institute for Justice, highlights significant rulings from federal appellate courts. This week’s edition includes a discussion on administrative law, featuring Professors Chris Walker and Nicholas Bagley, along with top administrative law attorney Zach Larsen.

Fourth Circuit Rules on Eminent Domain and Takings Clause

In 2006, the City of Baltimore used eminent domain to acquire a large parcel of land for a private developer. However, the planned development failed, leaving the area vacant, rat-infested, and a nuisance to neighboring property owners. The Fourth Circuit ruled that while the outcome was regrettable, the neighbors lacked standing under the Takings Clause to challenge the condemnation of their neighbors’ land.

Fourth Circuit Upholds Silencer Regulation Despite Second Amendment Challenge

Following the January 6 Capitol breach, a Navy reservist—later pardoned for his role—purchased over $40,000 in firearms and equipment, including modified gun-cleaning devices that function as silencers. He was convicted for possessing unregistered silencers. The Fourth Circuit declined to rule on whether silencers qualify as protected arms under the Second Amendment, instead affirming the licensing regime as presumptively constitutional under existing precedent.

Judge Wilkinson (concurring): Silencers are wholly outside the scope of the Second Amendment.

Judge Richardson (concurring): While circuit precedent requires rejecting the Second Amendment challenge, that precedent conflicts with the Second Amendment and Bruen.

Fifth Circuit Addresses Fourth Amendment Violation in Police Entry Case

A woman in Harris County, Texas, called 911 after hearing a knock at her door in the middle of the night. When officers arrived, no one was present. However, they returned 30 minutes later after receiving additional calls from the woman’s husband and son—who were not at the scene. The son provided dispatch with the wrong address, leading officers to mistakenly enter a neighbor’s home across the street. After realizing the error, they left but later returned, waking the sleeping neighbors at gunpoint. The Fifth Circuit partially reversed the dismissal of the case, leaving open the question of whether a Fourth Amendment violation occurred.

Seventh Circuit Deepens Circuit Split on Digital Privacy and Government Searches

The Seventh Circuit issued a ruling on whether Dropbox’s sharing of a user’s child pornography report with a quasi-governmental entity constituted a Fourth Amendment violation. The court held that the fine print in online terms of service—often unread by users—constitutes consent to government searches of electronic files. This decision further entrenches a circuit split on the issue, sparking skepticism among legal observers.

DHS Consent Decree Extension Dispute Reaches Seventh Circuit

In 2018, a class of noncitizens sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) over a policy involving warrantless arrests. In 2022, the district court entered a consent decree set to expire on May 12, 2025. In 2025, plaintiffs requested an extension, arguing DHS was not complying with the decree. The district court granted a short extension of 118 days, but DHS appealed, arguing against any further extension. The Seventh Circuit, over a dissent, upheld the short extension as permissible.