The immediate question asks if private land owners must exhaust all state-offered venues for mediation before seeking action in the federal courts.

[2] In 1985, in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, the Supreme Court held that in cases claiming just compensation for private property taken by state or local governments, the owner had to demonstrate that the case was ripe for litigation by exhausting state law remedies "first."

This decision had come under criticism as it denied property owners, and them alone, access to federal courts and to protection of the Fifth Amendment's Taking Clause.

Around 2008, another resident of the township discovered documentation that suggested one of their relatives may have been buried in a cemetery within Knick's land.

Because the ordinance and its threat of enforcement remained in place, Ms. Knick subsequently brought a lawsuit before the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, citing facial challenges based on the Township's new ordinance violating her Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights in addition to takings claims.

Knick was represented on appeal by the nonprofit public interest law firm Pacific Legal Foundation which specializes in property rights cases.

"[9] The opinion emphasized that when private land is taken there is a constitutional violation, and the case is ripe for litigation in the federal court system.

[2] Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority, and in a separate opinion, wrote "Stare decisis does not compel continued adherence to this erroneous precedent.