In the case of City of Eastlake et al. v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., the U.S Supreme Court ruled that a city charter amendment requiring public approval for zoning changes did not violate due process or equal protection clauses in the Fourteenth Amendment. The court held that legislative decisions about land use and development are subject to popular referenda, as they involve broad policy choices rather than individual rights or entitlements. Forest City Enterprises had sought to build multi-family housing on its property but was denied after residents voted against rezoning in a referendum mandated by an amendment to Eastlake's city charter. The company argued this amounted to deprivation without due process and violated their equal protection rights because it allowed arbitrary decision-making based on community sentiment rather than objective standards set out in law.

In the dissenting opinion for City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc., Justice William J. Brennan Jr., joined by Justices Potter Stewart and Thurgood Marshall, argued that the majority's decision to uphold a city charter provision allowing zoning changes only through public referendum was misguided. They contended that this ruling undermined established principles of representative democracy by permitting majoritarian tyranny over minority property rights without any compelling state interest justification. The dissenters believed that such direct democracy mechanisms should be limited to issues affecting all citizens equally rather than those primarily impacting individual property owners or small groups thereof. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential misuse of referenda processes for discriminatory purposes against unpopular land uses or minorities' housing opportunities in violation of equal protection guarantees under the Fourteenth Amendment.