Amicus brief argues Ninth Circuit wrongly denied city’s standing to challenge state law compelling speech on housing policy

Huntington Beach, CA – The Freedom Foundation is joining an amicus brief with 51 cities supporting Huntington Beach’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court in City of Huntington Beach v. Newsom. The petition challenges a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that denied the city standing to bring constitutional claims against California’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) law.

The RHNA law interferes with local control over housing policy by imposing high-density housing standards and compelling local officials to make statements endorsing high-density housing—a requirement Huntington Beach argues violates the First Amendment’s protection against coerced speech.

“California’s RHNA law represents government overreach at its worst, and when 51 cities are saying ‘enough,’ it’s clear that California has gone too far,” said Aaron Withe, CEO of the Freedom Foundation. “We’re proud to stand with Huntington Beach in defense of local self-governance and free speech rights.”

The Ninth Circuit did not address the merits of Huntington Beach’s constitutional claims, instead ruling that the city lacks standing simply because it is a political subdivision suing its parent state. The city argues this ruling violates multiple U.S. Supreme Court precedents, including Washington v. Seattle School District No. 1 and Board of Education v. Allen, which have allowed political subdivisions to bring similar challenges.

“The Ninth Circuit’s decision creates a dangerous precedent that would essentially immunize state governments from constitutional accountability,” said Ravi Prasad, Litigation Counsel for the Freedom Foundation. “If cities cannot challenge unconstitutional state mandates, then the First Amendment becomes meaningless at the local level.”

California’s RHNA law is part of a broader pattern of the state legislature limiting free speech and local autonomy. The Freedom Foundation is also actively litigating constitutional challenges to California’s “Gag Rule” that prevents public employers from informing employees of their constitutional right to refrain from union membership and dues payments.