The Supreme Court’s first term with a new majority is proving to be far more consequential than many Court-watchers anticipated, and in a good way. Long-dormant constitutional principles—such as the nondelegation doctrine—are being debated anew, and core rights are being refortified according to their original meaning.

On Friday in Knick v. Township of Scott, this constitutional revival project reached the Fifth Amendment ban on government takings of private property. A majority composed of the High Court’s conservatives voted 5-4 to overrule a 1985 precedent (Williamson County) that had created a significant obstacle to claims seeking just compensation for government takings.

Specifically, Williamson County required claimants to seek compensation in state courts before they could seek redress in federal court. But as Chief Justice John Roberts pointed out for the majority, the Court has also ruled that a denial in state court precludes any subsequent federal suit.

“The takings plaintiff thus finds himself in a Catch-22: He cannot go to federal court without going to state court first; but if he goes to state court and loses, his claim will be barred in federal court,” the Chief Justice wrote. “The federal claim dies aborning.”

Thus the state-litigation requirement “imposes an unjustifiable burden on takings plaintiffs,” conflicts with the Court’s other Fifth Amendment jurisprudence, “and must be overruled,” the Chief added.