The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a request by Huntington Beach to get involved in the city’s legal battle against the state over compliance with affordable housing policies.
The City Council challenged the constitutionality of California housing laws in federal court. After rulings against the city in the lower court and the federal appeals court, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider Huntington Beach’s appeal.
“City officials can’t use the First Amendment as an excuse to violate state housing law,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement Monday. “The Huntington Beach officials who wasted taxpayer dollars on this embarrassing approach rather than doing their jobs ought to be ashamed of themselves. Huntington Beach deserves better. What a waste of taxpayers’ dollars that could have gone to much-needed housing for their community.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta also hailed the high court’s rejection of the case.
“Huntington Beach took its fight to the highest court in the country — and lost,” Bonta said in a statement. “The U.S. Supreme Court officially declined to step in, leaving no doubt that the city must comply with our state housing laws. After years of meritless resistance that has wasted taxpayer dollars, Huntington Beach can no longer claim that the U.S. Constitution is on its side. It is not. We look forward to holding the city fully accountable in state court, where we recently secured a decision that requires it to remedy its violations and significantly restricts the city’s local control until it does so.”
HB Mayor Casey McKeon also issued a statement Monday.
“While it’s disappointing that the United States Supreme Court decided not to take up our Housing Lawsuit, it’s certainly not surprising, as the Supreme Court only takes up about 1% of the cases brought before it,” McKeon said.
“We felt our legal argument that the 9th District Court of Appeals’ claims of ‘lack of standing’ for Cities to sue their respective States in Federal Court needed to be adjudicated, as a lion’s share of the Circuits allow their Cities to sue their respective States in federal court on certain issues,” the mayor said. “There should be consistent, legal standing across the entire country.
“The voters of Huntington Beach elected us to defend our local control over municipal affairs, especially housing, and that’s what we will continue to do relentlessly,” McKeon’s statement concluded. “Even though this path has ended, other paths will always exist for us to continue to rigorously fight to defend the Huntington Beach residents’ local control.”
In December, the California Supreme Court refused to review an appellate court ruling favorable to the state requiring the city to comply with the affordable housing rules.
HB officials had argued that charter-city designation allows for more local government authority for self-governance, and as a result the city did not have to comply with the state’s requirements for approving proposed projects and eventually constructing affordable housing units.
The state sued Huntington Beach in March 2023, and a year later a San Diego Superior Court judge ruled the city violated the state’s Housing Element Law. That ruling, however, did not include remedies the state wanted. An appeals court panel overturned the Superior Court judge’s ruling, requiring the judge to reconsider the issue.
The city issued this statement after the state Supreme Court declined to review the case in December:
“The Supreme Court rarely grants review while a case is still developing in the trial court, and major legal questions remain unresolved, including the conflict between the Housing Element Law and CEQA and the Housing Department’s uneven enforcement. The City sought review after the Court of Appeal’s interim decision declined to address the CEQA conflict, leaving the City in a no-win situation: facing penalties unless it adopts a housing element, even though CEQA prohibits adoption until environmental review is completed and lawful findings can be made.”
Officials added that “because the litigation continues, (the Dec. 10) denial simply means the Supreme Court is not considering review at this time. The City will continue to vigorously defend its environmental stewardship, its charter-city authority, and its right to fair and evenhanded enforcement of State housing laws in the Superior Court.”
The California Department of Housing and Community Development provides information online about the Housing Element Law.
