458 U.S. 419 (1982) (U.S. Supreme Court)
Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan is a cornerstone of modern Takings Clause jurisprudence because it carved out a bright-line, per se rule: when the government authorizes a permanent physical occupation of private property, a taking has occurred, regardless of the occupation's size, the public interest it serves, or the minimal economic impact on the owner.
Does a state law that authorizes the permanent physical occupation of a portion of a property owner's building by cable television equipment constitute a taking per se, regardless of the public interests served or the minimal economic impact on the owner?
A permanent physical occupation authorized by the government is a per se taking under the Fifth Amendment, requiring just compensation without regard to the public purpose advanced, the size of the occupation, or the degree of economic impact. This rule is distinct from regulations that merely restrict the use of property, which are evaluated under multifactor balancing (e.g., Penn Central).
Yes. New York's law, insofar as it requires landlords to permit a permanent physical occupation of their buildings by cable television facilities, effects a taking per se. The statute is not invalid on its face, but the government must provide just compensation. The case was remanded for proceedings consistent with this ruling.
Loretto creates a bright-line, per se category within Takings Clause doctrine for government-authorized permanent physical occupations. It protects the core right to exclude and obviates the need for Penn Central balancing when the character of the government action is a permanent physical invasion. The decision thus provides important doctrinal clarity: permanent occupations are always takings, while regulations restricting use are generally analyzed under flexible, fact-intensive tests. The case is frequently paired with Kaiser Aetna (recognizing the right to exclude as fundamental) and contrasted with Penn Central and PruneYard. Later cases have cited Loretto to underscore that when the government appropriates a right of access or occupation, compensation is owed, even if the economic loss is small and the public interest is strong. For students, Loretto is a roadmap for spotting when a government action crosses the line from regulation into appropriation.