Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Constitutional Law

PDF

Fordham Law School

2011

Articles 1 - 11 of 11

Full-Text Articles in Law

Judicial Takings And State Action: Rereading Shelley After Stop The Beach Renourishment The Very Idea Of Judicial Takings, Nestor M. Davidson Jan 2011

Judicial Takings And State Action: Rereading Shelley After Stop The Beach Renourishment The Very Idea Of Judicial Takings, Nestor M. Davidson

Faculty Scholarship

When the Supreme Court recently dipped its toe into longstanding debates about judicial takings in Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the intimation that the Court might finally recognize the doctrine generated a wave of responses. Commentators concerned with the expansion of regulatory takings jurisprudence argued that it would be unwise to apply the Takings Clause to the judiciary; those inclined to defend a more vigorous application of the Clause, perhaps not surprisingly, saw a promising new avenue of vindication. It would be naive to argue that the Stop the Beach Renourishment plurality's logic could-or …

Go to article

Delegational Delusions: Why Judges Should Be Able To Delegate Reasonable Authority Over Stated Supervised Release Conditions, Eugenia Schraa Jan 2011

Delegational Delusions: Why Judges Should Be Able To Delegate Reasonable Authority Over Stated Supervised Release Conditions, Eugenia Schraa

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Note examines the constitutionality of allowing a probation officer the discretion to either impose or forego particular conditions of a supervised release, depending on the officer's assessment of the defendant's needs. Two federal Circuits allow probation officers to have such discretion; the majority have held that such arrangements violate Article III of the Constitution, which makes imposing a sentence an exclusively judicial task. In this Note, the author investigates the history of delegation of judicial function to non Article-III officers and examines the split in federal courts over this particular issue, ultimately advocating for the adoption of the so-called …

Go to article

Gallenthin V. Kaur: A Comparative Analysis Of How The New Jersey And New York Courts Approach Judicial Review Of The Exercise Of Eminent Domain For Redevelopment, Ronald K. Chen Jan 2011

Gallenthin V. Kaur: A Comparative Analysis Of How The New Jersey And New York Courts Approach Judicial Review Of The Exercise Of Eminent Domain For Redevelopment, Ronald K. Chen

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article explores two explanations for why New Jersey and New York take different approaches to judicial review of exercises of eminent domain. Part I examines the approach of both states and their differing procedures for review of administrative agency determinations. Part II discusses how each states' courts and legislatures define "blight." Part III examines how New York's approach leaves municipal officials and redevelopers free to use the more flexible concept of "underutilization" as a proxy for "blight."

Go to article

Public Use In The Dirigiste Tradition: Private And Public Benefit In An Era Of Agglomeration, Steven J. Eagle Jan 2011

Public Use In The Dirigiste Tradition: Private And Public Benefit In An Era Of Agglomeration, Steven J. Eagle

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Dirigisme is the "policy of state direction and control in economic and social matters. This Article examines dirigisme as it relates to state control of land use. It also analyzes the development of eminent domain law and the requirement that takings be for public use. The author argues that the New York Court of Appeals "subordinates constitutional protections for private property to centralized development," specifically examining the recent Goldstein and Kaur opinions. The Article also discusses the implications of condemnation for transfer for private redevelopment, including lack of transparency, secondary rent seeking, possibilities of corruption, and the inefficient use of …

Go to article

The Use And Abuse Of Blight In Eminent Domain, Martin E. Gold, Lynne B. Sagalyn Jan 2011

The Use And Abuse Of Blight In Eminent Domain, Martin E. Gold, Lynne B. Sagalyn

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article examines the term "blight" and how it is used in eminent domain cases. Part I discusses the development of the term and how various states define it. Part II lays out a hierarchy which may be used to compare the private benefits on one hand and the public benefits on the other hand in redevelopment projects. In Part III, the Columbia University expansion in Manhattanville is examined, at both the New York Appellate Division and Court of Appeals levels. Part IV discusses how forty-three states redefined blight after the Kelo case. Part V discusses how political and business …

Go to article

Condemning The Decisions Of The Past: Eminent Domain And Democratic Accountability, Christopher Serkin Jan 2011

Condemning The Decisions Of The Past: Eminent Domain And Democratic Accountability, Christopher Serkin

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Essay argues that there is a seldom-recognized purpose to eminent domain: preserving the ability of elected representatives to respond to the will of the people. The author proposes that eminent domain allows government to depart from the policy choices of administrations which came before and is therefore a tool for acquiring "democratic legitimacy." He explores this theory by examining examples such as breaking up the adult use zones in Times Square and reclaiming New York's waterfront, which had been essentially cut off by highways.

Go to article

Let There Be Blight: Blight Condemnations In New York After Goldstein And Kaur, Ilya Somin Jan 2011

Let There Be Blight: Blight Condemnations In New York After Goldstein And Kaur, Ilya Somin

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article analyzes the New York cases of Kaur v. New York State Urban Development Corp. and Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corp. and asserts that the New York Court of Appeals erred in allowing such an expansive definition of "blight" and defining pretextual takings too narrowly. Part I Describes the two cases. Part II explains the concept of blight condemnation and how it was used in the two cases. Part III discusses how the two cases treat the federal constitutional standard for pretextual takings. The Article concludes that eminent domain reform requires a narrower definition of "blight" …

Go to article

The Problem With Pretext, Lynn E. Blais Jan 2011

The Problem With Pretext, Lynn E. Blais

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article examines the problems with the Supreme Court's holding in Kelo v. City of New London that the concept of public use is expansive unless the government is asserting the public use as a "mere pretext" and the true purpose is private benefit. The author examines the level of scrutiny applied in such cases, the link between pretext and motive, and the tests applied to evaluate pretext challenges: the burden-shifting motives test, the sufficiency of the plan taste, and the benefits to the public test. The author concludes that pretext is an "unworkable mechanism" for evaluating public use cases.

Go to article

Reclaiming The Promise Of The Judicial Branch: Toward A More Meaningful Standard Of Judicial Review As Applied To New York Eminent Domain Law, Paula Franzese Jan 2011

Reclaiming The Promise Of The Judicial Branch: Toward A More Meaningful Standard Of Judicial Review As Applied To New York Eminent Domain Law, Paula Franzese

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article asserts that the New York model of eminent domain and judicial review must be reworked to provide a meaningful balance between private property rights and concerns for public good. Part I sets forth current doctrine and procedure which New York agencies must follow when exercising the power of eminent domain. Part II explores how blight has become a "standardless standard" in New York. Part III examines New York courts' reluctance to overturn agency decisions and the potential for abuse that this creates. Part IV examines other jurisdictions which have imposed stricter standards when examining public use. Part V …

Go to article

Historical Roots Of Citizens United Vs. Fec: How Anarchists And Academics Accidentally Created Corporate Speech Rights, The General Essay, Zephyr Teachout Jan 2011

Historical Roots Of Citizens United Vs. Fec: How Anarchists And Academics Accidentally Created Corporate Speech Rights, The General Essay, Zephyr Teachout

Faculty Scholarship

This paper looks at how the early rhetoric around the First Amendment enabled later development of corporate political speech rights.

Go to article

Boumediene, Munaf, And The Supreme Court's Misreading Of The Insular Cases , Andrew Kent Jan 2011

Boumediene, Munaf, And The Supreme Court's Misreading Of The Insular Cases , Andrew Kent

Faculty Scholarship

In 2008, the Supreme Court embraced both global constitutionalism - the view that the Constitution provides judicially enforceable rights to non-citizens outside the sovereign territory of the United States - and what I call human-rights universalism - the view that the Constitution protects military enemies during armed conflict. Boumediene v. Bush found a constitutional right to habeas corpus for non-citizens detained as enemy combatants at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba, while Munaf v. Geren - decided the same day as Boumediene and involving U.S. citizens detained in Iraq during the war there - hinted that the Due Process …

Go to article