When airports accept federal money through the FAA's Airport Improvement Program, they agree to a set of conditions known as grant assurances. These include requirements to keep the airport open, to allow reasonable public access, and to avoid discriminating among categories of aircraft users. The assurances typically last for 20 years after the most recent grant is accepted.

East Hampton stopped accepting new federal grants, and the Town's grant assurance obligations expired in late September 2021. This was a deliberate strategy: by letting the grants lapse, the Town hoped to free itself from FAA oversight and regain the ability to set local rules.

An additional complication was the enduring reach of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA). This federal law requires any public airport proprietor to follow specific procedures before imposing noise or access restrictions — including conducting a detailed study, providing public notice, and, in some cases, obtaining FAA approval. The critical question was whether ANCA applied even after grant assurances expired.

The answer came in 2016, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in Friends of the East Hampton Airport v. Town of East Hampton that ANCA's procedural requirements apply to all public airport proprietors, regardless of whether they receive federal funding. The Town appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case in 2017.

This ruling had immediate consequences. The Town had enacted a set of restrictions in 2015 — including an overnight curfew, an extended curfew for noisier aircraft, and a limit of one trip per week for designated “noisy” aircraft during the summer months. The Second Circuit decision effectively struck down all three.

After years of legal setbacks, the Town pursued a different strategy. In January 2022, the Town Board voted to close the airport entirely and, days later, reopen it as a new private-use facility operating under a “prior permission required” (PPR) framework. The theory was that by creating a “new” airport, the Town could sidestep ANCA's restrictions — because ANCA governs public-use airports, and a private-use facility was thought to fall outside its scope — and set its own rules from scratch.

The planned restrictions were significant: aircraft would be limited to one takeoff and one landing per day; airport hours would be set from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on weekdays and from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekends; and noisier aircraft would face additional limitations.

The plan immediately drew legal challenges from multiple parties. Blade Air Mobility (which operates helicopter and seaplane service between Manhattan and the Hamptons), East End Hangars, and the Coalition to Keep East Hampton Airport Open each filed suit. The National Business Aviation Association also intervened.

On May 16, 2022 — one day before the planned closure — Suffolk County Supreme Court Justice Paul Baisley Jr. issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Town from proceeding. The airport remained open, but the FAA had already processed the identifier change from HTO to JPX on its own timeline, creating a confusing situation: the airport was legally still public, but its FAA charts labeled it as private.

The legal dispute intensified over the next two years. In May 2023, Justice Baisley found the Town in civil contempt for violating the restraining order and ordered it to pay the plaintiffs $250,000, plus $1,000 per day in ongoing fines, plus the plaintiffs' attorney fees.

In March 2024, the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court issued a mixed ruling. It affirmed the core finding that the Town had failed to comply with ANCA's procedural requirements, effectively blocking the closure-and-reopening strategy. However, it overturned the $250,000 penalty and daily fine as improper. The appellate court's message was plain: the Town cannot use closure and reopening as a workaround to avoid ANCA. If it wants to impose restrictions, it must go through the formal ANCA process.