Maryland landowners want Supreme Court to weigh in on eminent domain battle

WESTMINSTER, Md. — Attorneys are now eyeing the highest court in the land as the next step in a years-long power struggle over landowners' rights.

The nonprofit Pacific Legal Foundation has petitioned the United States Supreme Court to challenge the latest ruling in the case of the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project, or MPRP.

"We see this as an eminent domain abuse type of case," Aaron Newell said.

Newell, an attorney with the PLF, says the organization has been keeping a close eye on it as it's been unfolding in the federal court system. The nonprofit represents cases that challenge government overreach, pro bono.

In 2024, more than 100 landowners across Baltimore, Carroll and Frederick counties learned of the plans by Public Service Enterprise Group, or PSEG, to build 67 miles of power lines along a path that cuts directly through their properties in order to support higher energy needs with the boom of data centers in neighboring northern Virginia.

PSEG reported it needed permission to access these private properties for environmental surveys. When it couldn't get voluntary compliance, the company sought it through the courts, which granted its preliminary injunction for limited access in June 2025. The Maryland 4th Circuit Court of Appeals later upheld it.

Attorneys argue the company took a judicial shortcut rather than wait to be granted eminent domain by the Maryland Public Service Commission.

"They've jumped the gun really far in terms of they don't have approval for this project yet and they're going to federal court to try to get surveys, even though they don't have a certificate yet," Newell said.

Newell said he's confident the Supreme Court will take on the case. He said the justices have an interest in property rights cases, and he points to a "circuit split," meaning different federal courts across the country do not agree on how to handle similar cases. He said SCOTUS is more likely to tackle these cases to keep things consistent.

He also points to the ruling in Trump v. CASA last year that limited the powers of lower courts' broad use of preliminary injunctions. He said their ultimate goal is to limit the power as well.

"These injunctions are meant to preserve a right somebody already has and to hold the status quo in place. In this case, the federal court has given them a right and has disrupted the status quo," Newell said.

If SCOTUS takes on the case, the update will come early next year. Oral arguments could be heard before 2027 is over.

WMAR-2 News reached out to PSEG for comment, but did not hear back.

Related coverage:

• Hunting ban proposed ahead of short season in struggle over proposed power line project
• Is eminent domain on the table? Judge hears arguments in PSEG power lines case
• Pushing back against power lines: Landowners file motion to dismiss
• 70 miles of proposed power lines raise tough questions
  

This story was initially reported by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy.