California Building Industry Assn. v. San Jose, 577 U.S. 1179

San Jose enacted Ordinance No. 28689 requiring developers of new residential projects (20+ units) to reserve at least 15% of for-sale units for low-income buyers.
Reserved units must be sold at an "affordable housing cost" (capped at 30% of buyer median income) and remain subject to affordability controls for 45 years.
California Building Industry Association (CBIA) sued to enjoin the ordinance as an uncompensated taking under the Fifth Amendment.
Trial court enjoined the ordinance; California Court of Appeal reversed; California Supreme Court affirmed the reversal.
The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari. Justice Thomas concurred in the denial, emphasizing an unresolved, important Takings Clause issue on whether Nollan/Dolan apply to legislative exactions but concluding this case was not a suitable vehicle to resolve it.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether legislative exactions are subject to Nollan/Dolan nexus and rough-proportionality test	CBIA: Ordinance is a taking; Nollan/Dolan should apply to legislative measures	City: Different standard applies to legislative measures; measure survives if reasonably related to public welfare	Court denied cert; did not reach or resolve the question
Whether this case is a proper vehicle to decide the legislative-vs-administrative question	CBIA: Sought review to resolve conflict in lower courts	City: Raised threshold timeliness and procedural issues; petitioner disclaimed reliance on Nollan/Dolan below	Certiorari denied; procedural defects and posture made it unsuitable for resolving the split

Nollan v. California Coastal Comm’n, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) (established nexus requirement for land-use exactions)
Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994) (established rough-proportionality requirement for exactions)
Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist., 570 U.S. 595 (2013) (applied Nollan/Dolan framework to monetary and permit-denial contexts)