Zoning and Its Discontents

By Anthony Flint, March, 27, 2026

Of all the major Supreme Court decisions of the 20th century, there’s one that stands out for shaping the way we live and the physical contours of the American landscape: Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., which affirmed that cities and towns could institute zoning as a way to regulate all growth and development.

The case came out of a suburb just east of Cleveland in the 1920s, when a real estate company was denied the use of land for industrial development; appeals went all the way to the Supreme Court, which backed the village of Euclid, and in so doing provided constitutional blessing to the basic concept of zoning seen in color-coded maps to this day—homes in one part of town, commercial and retail in another, and manufacturing and industrial uses in yet another.

At the time, Justice George Sutherland made the comment that a factory shouldn’t be in a residential area any more than “a pig in the parlor.” He also said apartment buildings shouldn’t be mixed in with single-family homes, saying the presence of residential density was like welcoming in a “parasite.”

That was in 1926, and this year, scholars and policymakers are marking the 100th anniversary of the Euclid decision, as zoning is being reevaluated across the country. Some 33 states have passed reforms to allow more density in zones once reserved for single-family homes only, and to promote the concept of mixed-use, blending housing with shops, restaurants, and workplaces all within walking distance—basically the kind of neighborhoods that Euclid made illegal. The critique suggests that American zoning is outdated and hasn’t kept up with the times—and, perhaps most important, that its application has made housing unaffordable and racially segregated.

For those reasons, zoning is “starting to be at least chipped away at by state and even local legislation,” said William Fischel, professor emeritus at Dartmouth College, in an interview on the latest episode of the Land Matters podcast.

Fischel is author of the book Zoning Rules, published in 2015 by the Lincoln Institute and cited in the early pages of Abundance by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, who blame excessive regulation for blocking housing and infrastructure projects. He is also author of The Homevoter Hypothesis, an explanation of how mostly single-family homeowners have used zoning and environmental regulations to preserve the status quo.

Zoning emerged out of concern for public health and the need to organize cities to accommodate manufacturing and residential development following the invention of the automobile, says Fischel, who was the keynote speaker at a symposium at George Mason University earlier this year cosponsored by the Mercatus Center, the Pacific Legal Foundation and the Journal of Law, Economics and Policy.

Listen to the show here or subscribe to Land Matters on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, YouTube, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Further Reading

Zoning Rules! The Economics of Land Use Regulation | Lincoln Institute

How Zoning Won—and Why It’s Now Losing Ground | Lincoln Institute

Have We Reached Peak Zoning? | The Future of Where

Here’s Looking at Euclid | Cite Journal

Goodbye, Zoning? | Vanderbilt Law Review

Analyzing Land Readjustment: Economics, Law, and Collective Action | Lincoln Institute

Anthony Flint is a senior fellow at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, host of the Land Matters podcast, and a contributing editor of Land Lines.