Digital Commons Network^™

Martin V. United States, Mitch L. Werbell V

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In Martin v. United States, the Federal Circuit Court dismissed a Fifth Amendment regulatory takings and exaction claim for want of ripeness when the claimant failed to apply for a permit, which would have allowed for an assessment of the cost of compliance with governmentally imposed requirements. By finding the claim unripe, the court stood firm on the historical view that federal courts may only adjudicate land-use regulatory takings and inverse condemnation claims on the merits after a regulating entity has made a final decision. However, jurisprudential evolution of the ripeness doctrine and judicial review of takings claims may …

Clearing The Air: Does Choosing Agency Deference In Security Clearance Rulings Dilute Constitutional Challenges?, Frank Russo

Catholic University Law Review

The ability to obtain a security clearance has a wide-ranging impact from job placement to questions of fitness in a presidential election. Sustaining a functional career in intelligence, national security, and many other federal fields within the United States is nearly impossible without proper security clearance. In 2016, the importance of proper clearance evolved into a national debate as each presidential candidate staked claims that their opposition should be excluded from receiving sensitive material.

This Comment begins with a detailed history of modern security clearance procedures and MSPB reviews of clearance revocations. Part I focuses on those who need security …

Federalism, Convergence, And Divergence In Constitutional Property, Gerald S. Dickinson

Articles

Federal law exerts a gravitational force on state actors, resulting in widespread conformity to federal law and doctrine at the state level. This has been well recognized in the literature, but scholars have paid little attention to this phenomenon in the context of constitutional property. Traditionally, state takings jurisprudence—in both eminent domain and regulatory takings—has strongly gravitated towards the Supreme Court’s takings doctrine. This long history of federal-state convergence, however, was disrupted by the Court’s controversial public use decision in Kelo v. City of New London. In the wake of Kelo, states resisted the Court’s validation of the …