> and obviously wouldn't work in other countries
It wouldn't work e.g. in Germany since here we don't have "home owners associations" that reduce the freedom of whole housing areas. That is: you are "mostly" free in the first place to grow whatever you want.
Mostly ? because there is always complexity with law. For example, if you grow a huge tree that takes all the sun from your neighbor, then you're tapping into the freedom of your neighbor. And then the neighbor can ask you to remove or at least trim the tree ... absolute freedom almost always hinder others.
And so yes, there are cases where people though "My own freedom for a posh garden is diminished due to the biosphere of my neighbor, All the weed seeds are flowing to me". And people took others before court. And then each individual case is looked at. And often enough the case is just turned down because of the constitution guaranteeing freedom of expression.
And that, in turn, means that "obviously won't work in other countries" is wrong.
How US-Americans with one of the worst constitution and law systems of the western world constantly think that "only they" have something freedom-related is beyond me. If you look at your history ... you had slavery --- with your current constitution. You had genocide and trail of tears --- with your current constitution. You have gerrymandering --- with your current constitution. You sentence people to death but from 7482 death penalties of 1973-2004 a whole 4.1% were in error --- under your constitution. Each of these was or is an extreme reduction of people's freedom.