Montana’s 2025 reforms reportedly instruct state courts to default toward the 'free use of property.' That judicial presumption narrows the scope of NIMBY challenges and tilts litigation toward permitting rather than blocking homes. Turning court standards into a pro‑building lever could matter as much as zoning text.
— If legal presumptions can shift housing outcomes, reformers may target judicial standards—not just statutes—to unlock supply.
David Schleicher
2025.09.01
86% relevant
The article argues that despite state-level YIMBY reforms, local judges and litigation (e.g., Minneapolis plan halted by a district court; CEQA‑style maneuvers like historic designations and habitat claims) still block building—precisely the problem Montana’s 'free use' judicial presumption tries to solve by narrowing NIMBY suits.
Alex Tabarrok
2025.08.29
76% relevant
The article argues jurisdictions should stop prohibiting unrelated adults from sharing a home and notes Iowa, Oregon, and Colorado preempted local roommate caps—an application of a 'free use of property' presumption to unlock housing capacity.
M. Nolan Gray
2025.08.25
100% relevant
Montana 'established that state courts should default in favor of “the free use of property.”'