How one woman's home equity theft case made its way to the Supreme Court
A SCOTUS decision could have wide-ranging effects on how at least a dozen states repurchase houses


The Supreme Court is hearing its last scheduled oral argument for the current term, in a case involving a 94-year-old woman's home in Minnesota. The trial could have wide-ranging effects on home equity theft and the way that at least a dozen states repurchase people's houses.
What is the case about?
Geraldine Tyler is suing Hennepin County, Minnesota, alleging that they violated the now 94-year-old's civil rights by taking her property without just compensation. The issue began back in 2010, when Tyler, then 81, moved out of her Minneapolis condo into a nursing home. Tyler admitted that she stopped paying taxes on the condo after she moved out. Between the unpaid taxes, interest, and fees, Tyler eventually accrued nearly $15,000 in debt to Hennepin County, Forbes reports.
Hennepin County eventually seized Tyler's old condo, and NPR notes that "Tyler does not dispute that the county repeatedly notified her that she risked losing the condo if she didn't pay up." After the seizure, the county sold the condo for $40,000. However, the county kept not only the $15,000 that Tyler owed, but also the $25,000 left over, leaving Tyler with nothing.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Despite Tyler's objections, this string of events is legal in Minnesota — at least for now. This is because, when it comes to collecting government debts, Minnesota and other states are allowed to keep the profits they receive from a tax surplus, Forbes notes. As a result, Tyler sued Hennepin County, arguing that she should have received the $25,000 difference.
The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), which represents Tyler, argues that by keeping the full amount, Hennepin County unconstitutionally seized her property. They call this phenomenon "home equity theft." In states where this is legal, "if a property owner fails to pay or underpays his property taxes, even by just a few dollars, the local government or a private lienholder can eventually take the entire property, along with the owner's equity," PLF reports, even though the equity is typically worth much more than the debt itself.
How do the justices feel about the case?
Justices are routinely stoic during oral arguments, so it can often be hard to gauge their opinions on a particular case. However, signs seem to point to the Supreme Court swinging toward Tyler's success, based on eyewitnesses who were in the room.
The nine justices seemed to be in "broad favor" of Tyler's argument, and even conservative Justice Clarence Thomas said she was "saying the county took her property and made a profit on her surplus equity. It belongs to her," Supreme Court correspondent Mark Sherman reports for The Associated Press. Sherman notes that Justices Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch, despite being on opposite sides of the ideological spectrum, said Hennepin County seemed to think it could seize million-dollar properties over small tax bills.
"I mean, $5,000 tax debt; $5 million house. Take the house; don't give back the rest?" Kagan hypothetically asked the county's attorney, who essentially confirmed the justice's question.
The justices all seemed "receptive" to Tyler's argument, adds Supreme Court reporter Lawrence Hurley for NBC News. Hurley writes that the justices seemed to question the merit of limiting government power when they could seize property without giving back a surplus. "The Constitution seemed to have a different idea in mind," Chief Justice John Roberts said. The newest member of the Court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, questioned whether there would even be a "real, big, practical problem" in siding with Tyler.
What's next?
The Supreme Court's decision is not expected to be released until this coming summer. However, given the justice's questioning during oral arguments, it seems likely, though not certain, that they will find in favor of Tyler.
This could potentially impact the legality of this type of home equity practice in states where it is currently legal. These laws "can have a big impact on seniors struggling to pay property taxes after retirement," USA Today writes. With the justices seemingly concerned with the state law, a potential ruling in favor of Tyler could end up forcing changes to the way that states are able to buy back property.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Justin Klawans has worked as a staff writer at The Week since 2022. He began his career covering local news before joining Newsweek as a breaking news reporter, where he wrote about politics, national and global affairs, business, crime, sports, film, television and other news. Justin has also freelanced for outlets including Collider and United Press International.
-
Scientists want to fight malaria by poisoning mosquitoes with human blood
Under the radar Drugging the bugs
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
Crossword: March 31, 2025
The Week's daily crossword
By The Week Staff Published
-
Sudoku medium: March 31, 2025
The Week's daily medium sudoku puzzle
By The Week Staff Published
-
Supreme Court upholds 'ghost gun' restrictions
Speed Read Ghost guns can be regulated like other firearms
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
MAGA's push to impeach federal judges
In the Spotlight Trump launches a 'stunning assault' on judicial branch
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
How are attorneys dealing with Trump's attacks on law firms?
Today's Big Question Trump has sanctioned the law firm that investigated his dealings with Stormy Daniels, among others
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
SCOTUS: A glimmer of independence?
Feature The Supreme Court rejects Trump’s request to freeze nearly $2 billion in foreign aid payments
By The Week US Published
-
Why is MAGA turning on Amy Coney Barrett?
Today's Big Question She may be the swing vote on Trump cases
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Supreme Court rules against Trump on aid freeze
Speed Read The court rejected the president's request to freeze nearly $2 billion in payments for foreign humanitarian work
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
'The world is watching this deal closely'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
North Carolina Supreme Court risks undermining its legitimacy
Under the radar A contentious legal battle over whether to seat one of its own members threatens not only the future of the court's ideological balance, but its role in the public sphere
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published