Pung v. Isabella County
| Pung v. Isabella County | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Decided June 23, 2026 | |
| Full case name | Pung v. Isabella County |
| Docket no. | 25-95 |
| Citations | 609 U.S. ___ (more) |
| Holding | |
| The proper baseline for measuring "just compensation" following a tax sale is the auction sale price, not the property’s hypothetical fair market value, at least when the sale is fairly conducted in light of the country's history of tax sales. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Alito, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson; Thomas (except II-B) |
| Concurrence | Sotomayor, joined by Gorsuch, Jackson |
| Concurrence | Thomas (in part), joined by Gorsuch (except n.1) |
Pung v. Isabella County, 609 U.S. ___ (2026), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that the proper baseline for measuring "just compensation" following a tax sale is the auction sale price, not the property’s hypothetical fair market value, at least when the sale is fairly conducted in light of the country's history of tax sales.[1][2][3][4][5][6]
Background
The Pung family owed $2,241.93 in real-property taxes, so local tax authorities in Isabella County, Michigan, initiated foreclosure proceedings and sold the Pung home—which was assessed at $194,400 for tax purposes—for $76,008 at public auction. Michael Pung sued in federal district court, and the district court granted Pung partial summary judgment on his Fifth Amendment claim. The court held that Pung should receive only the surplus proceeds from the tax sale—i.e., the difference between the sale price and the tax debt—not the property’s fair market value. The district court also rejected Pung's claim under the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.[1]
The Supreme Court granted certiorari.[1]
Opinion of the court
The Supreme Court issued an opinion on June 23, 2026.[1]
Later developments
References
- 1 2 3 4 Syllabus of Pung v. Isabella County, No. 25-95, 609 U.S. ___ (2026).
This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain. - ↑ Mann, Ronald (June 23, 2026). "Justices reject constitutional attack on foreclosure rules". www.scotusblog.com. Retrieved June 26, 2026.
- ↑ "Isabella County wins Supreme Court property tax foreclosure case". mlive. June 24, 2026. Retrieved June 26, 2026.
- ↑ Somin, Ilya (June 23, 2026). "Supreme Court Issues Terrible Takings Decision in Pung v. Isabella County". Reason.com. Retrieved June 26, 2026.
- ↑ Erb, Kelly Phillips. "Supreme Court Rejects Fair Market Value In Tax Sale Case, But Keeps Challenge Alive". Forbes. Retrieved June 26, 2026.
- ↑ Groppe, Maureen. "Supreme Court lets Michigan family fight foreclosure in equity theft case". USA TODAY. Retrieved June 26, 2026.
External links
- Text of Pung v. Isabella County, No. 25-95, 609 U.S. ___ (2026) is available from: Internet Archive (docket files) Justia