Law Commons^™

“Zoning” Matters: Rluipa And The New Normal Of Religious Discrimination, Michael Allan Wolf

San Diego Law Review

The protection of religious freedom under federal law waxes and wanes, depending on two unpredictable factors: judicial activism and congressional action. A review of dozens of cases involving alleged violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), including two recent cases heard by the Supreme Court and the Fourth Circuit, reveals for the first time that many litigants and judges have ignored the congressional injunction to limit the reach of RLUIPA to two (and only two) forms of land-use regulation: zoning and landmarking. Plaintiffs have instead used RLUIPA to challenge water and sewer, septic, fire prevention, building, …

The Oberlin Saga: Integrating North America’S Pipeline System And Potential Impacts On Hydrogen, Samuel Stephens

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

This Article explores how the D.C. Circuit’s decision in City of Oberlin, Ohio v. FERC (2022) (Oberlin II) will impact future natural gas pipelines and potentially even future hydrogen infrastructure. While the decision reinforced support for integrating North American natural gas infrastructure, given uncertainties in how the United States will regulate the emerging hydrogen industry, there is a chance that the decision could be more expansive than what initially meets the eye. By continuing down the path of supporting North American energy integration, Congress, federal courts, and administrative agencies will help prepare the United States for an uncertain energy future. …

Property And Prosperity, A Demythifying Story, Xiaoqian Hu

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Economic development is fundamentally a property law story. Prominent thinkers―from Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham, to Douglass North and Richard Posner―tell us that protection of private property rights is essential for economic growth and wealth accumulation. Clear and freely alienable property rights reduce transaction costs and allow private bargaining to produce efficient results. Property rights allow owners to internalize the costs and benefits of their own behavior, reduce production costs, and encourage innovation. Secure property rights protect owners from arbitrary confiscation by the government, foster owner expectations, and facilitate investment, trade, and the development of financial markets. The idea …

A Perpetual Cycle Of “Give-And-Take”: The Case For Texas Eminent Domain Reform, Kathryn Faulk

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.

A New Takings Clause? The Implications Of Cedar Point Nursery V. Hassid For Property Rights And Moratoria, Benjamin Alexander Mogren

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In part, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution holds that “no person . . . shall [have their] private property . . . taken for public use, without just compensation.” In Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that “a California regulation that permits union organizers to enter the property of agricultural business to talk with employees about supporting a union is unconstitutional.” The purpose of this Note is to discuss what Cedar Point Nursery means generally for the future of Takings Clause analysis and will argue that Cedar Point Nursery should be seen as a …

Does The Constitution Allow Private Companies To Use Eminent Domain Against A State? Penn East Pipeline Co., Llc V. New Jersey, Crystal J. Anthony

Ocean and Coastal Law Journal

In 2021 the United States Supreme Court decided in the case PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey that Section 717(h) of the Natural Gas Act authorized the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to delegate the government’s eminent domain power to private companies. The Court’s decision allows a private company to condemn all “necessary rights-of-way,” whether privately-owned or state-owned land. This case note explores the history of the government’s eminent domain power and the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity from lawsuits. The majority opinion in PennEast reasoned that the states waived their sovereign immunity at the ratification of the Constitution. Thus, according …

Game Of Thrones: Liberty & Eminent Domain, Mitchell F. Crusto

University of Miami Law Review

This Article analyzes the relationship between private property and the government’s power to expropriate it. When it comes to protecting private property from governmental expropriation, our Constitution is conflicted. On the one hand, the right to private property is a foundational principle that defines the American spirit, our history, and our culture. Yet, on the other hand, the Founders adopted the government’s superior authority over private property, that is, eminent domain, for public purpose and with just compensation, via the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This “private property conundrum” requires us to explore the limits of eminent domain relative …

A Cost To Bear—Environmental Contamination And Eminent Domain, Evan C. Heaney

Seattle University Law Review

This Note advocates for Washington courts to adopt a system that universally allows evidence of environmental contamination on the private property taken in eminent domain proceedings. Part I of this Note discusses the history and progression of eminent domain and the broader constitutional roots of the Takings Clause. Part II explores Washington’s environmental remediation statute. Part III details the various approaches jurisdictions around the county have formulated to deal with this issue. Part IV argues Washington courts should adopt the inclusionary approach, which allows the introduction of environmental evidence in eminent domain proceedings.

Evaluating Emergency Takings: Flattening The Economic Curve, Robert H. Thomas

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Desperate times may breed desperate measures, but when do desperate measures undertaken as a response to an emergency trigger the Fifth Amendment’s requirement that the government provides just compensation when it takes private property for public use? The answer to that question has commonly been posed as a choice between the “police power”—a sovereign government’s power to regulate property’s use in order to further the public health, safety, and welfare—and the eminent domain power, the authority to seize private property for public use with the corresponding requirement to pay compensation. But that should not be the question. After all, emergencies …

Valuation Blunders In The Law Of Eminent Domain, Richard A. Epstein

Notre Dame Law Review

In dealing with the valuation problem, I will bracket these estimation issues in order to look to different and disturbing types of difficulties in the valuation enterprise. The law of eminent domain starts with the implicit assumption that the government is in general a good actor whose motives and laudable and whose behavior does not need excessive judicial oversight. Hence the general norm of judicial deference often applies to valuation decisions. In the cases that I shall review, as well as others, a general pattern emerges, whereby all doubtful valuation questions that arise dealing with key problems are at best …

Don't Condemn My Creek: Using Eminent Domain To Satisfy Environmental Obligations, Mason E. Heidt, Joshua Wysor

Belmont Law Review

No abstract provided.

Time For A Change In Eminent Domain: A “Dirt Farmer’S” Story Shows Why Just Compensation Should Include Lost Profits, Edward Walton

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Hb 434 - Eminent Domain, Ashley M. Bowcott, Derek M. Schwahn

Georgia State University Law Review

The Act amends Georgia’s eminent domain laws by providing an exception to the general rule that condemnations cannot be converted to any use, other than a public use, for twenty years. The Act creates a new procedure which requires the condemnor to petition the jurisdiction’s superior court to determine whether the property is blighted property. Additionally, the condemnor must provide notice to all owners of the alleged blighted property. If the court finds the land is blighted property, the condemnor must file a petition to condemn the property according to the established procedure set forth in Article 3 Chapter 2 …

Reverse Exactions, Gregory M. Stein

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

When an owner applies for a permit to use property in a certain way, the government body with jurisdiction can either deny the permit, grant the permit outright, or grant the permit subject to conditions. These conditions—known as “exactions”—must meet two constitutional thresholds. First, there must be a close linkage between a problem the owner’s project will create or exacerbate, such as increased traffic caused by a proposed new shopping mall, and the exaction the government proposes, such as the dedication of land for a new right-turn lane. Second, the condition the government suggests must be proportional in magnitude to …

California’S Curse: Perpetual Drought And Persistent Land Development, Gabrielle Kavounas

San Diego Law Review

This Comment argues that the California state legislature should take direct control of private water use rights through legislation that amends California’sConstitution Article X, Section 2, providing the state with the police powerto take back private water rights and centralize control over water management and distribution.[1] It also recommends imposing higher requirements for land development and water agency cooperation in standard form, state-controlled“general plans” to create efficiency in distributing water throughout the stateand in planning new land developments. The public trust doctrine, eminentdomain doctrine, and regulatory takings doctrine are possible justifications the state could use to effectuate the new legislation. …

An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings, James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk

William & Mary Law Review

Takings scholarship has long focused on the niceties of Supreme Court doctrine, while ignoring the operation of takings law “on the ground”—in the state and lower federal courts, which together decide the vast bulk of all takings cases. This study, based primarily on an empirical analysis of more than 2000 reported decisions over the period 1979 through 2012, attempts to fill that void.

This study establishes that the Supreme Court’s categorical rules govern almost no state takings cases, and that takings claims based on government regulation almost invariably fail. By contrast, when takings claims arise out of government action other …

Exploiting Ambiguity In The Supreme Court: Cutting Through The Fifth Amendment With Transferable Development Rights, Trevor D. Vincent

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Why South Carolina Should Eliminate The Personal Income Tax, Stephanie L. Yarbrough

South Carolina Law Review

No abstract provided.

An Unintended Consequence Of Arkansas Game & Fish Commission V. United States: Expanding Takings Liability To What The Government Doesn’T Do, Jason Kane

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

Farming The Slums: Using Eminent Domain And Urban Agriculture To Rebuild Baltimore's Blighted Neighborhoods, Keith Buzby

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

The Unskinnable Cat: Debt Reduction, Eminent Domain And The Contract Clause, Clay A. Counts

Saint Louis University Public Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nevada's Residential Real Estate Crisis: Local Governments And The Use Of Eminent Domain To Condemn Mortgage Notes, Ngai Pindell

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Agins V. City Of Tiburon: An Aggrieved Party-Loss Of Inverse Condemnation Actions In Zoning Ordinance Disputes , Walter R. Luostari

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Causation When Determining The Proper Defendant In A Takings Lawsuit, Jan G. Laitos

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

"Property" In The Constitution: The View From The Third Amendment, Tom W. Bell

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

During World War II, after Japan attacked the Aleutian Islands off Alaska’s coast, the United States forcibly evacuated the islands’ natives and quartered soldiers in private homes. That hitherto unremarked violation of the Third Amendment gives us a fresh perspective on what the term “property” means in the United States Constitution. As a general legal matter, property includes not just real estate—land, fixtures attached thereto, and related rights—but also various kinds of personal property, ranging from tangibles, such as books, to intangibles, such as causes of action. That knowledge would, if we interpreted the Constitution as we do other legal …

Kelo, Conservation Easements, And Forever: Why Eminent Domain Is Not A Sufficient Check On Conservation Easements' Perpetual Duration, Derrick P. Fellows

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.

An End-Run Around The Takings Clause? The Law And Economics Of Bivens Actions For Property Rights Violations, Arpan A. Sura

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Maintaining Government Accountability: Calls For A "Public Use" Beyond Eminent Domain, Gregory S. Knapp

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Charitable Deductions For Rail-Trail Conversions: Reconciling The Partial Interest Rule And The National Trails System Act, Scott Andrew Bowman, Danaya H. Rosenberg

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

This Article examines an undeveloped legal topic at the intersection of tax law and real property law: charitable deductions from income tax liability for donations of railroad corridors that are to be converted into recreational trails. The very popular rails-to-trails program assists in the conversion of abandoned railroad corridors into hiking and biking trails. However, the legal questions surrounding the property rights of these corridors have been complex and highly litigated. In 1983, Congress amended the National Trails System Act to provide a mechanism for facilitating these conversions, a process called railbanking. In essence, a railroad transfers its real property …

Net Neutrality: An International Policy For The United States, Frederick W. Pfister

San Diego International Law Journal

Consider this scenario: Alex and John still are avid video game players and play hours a day, each connecting from the same town through different ISPs. However, since it is a peak Internet traffic time, it may be difficult for them to play. While Alex has the "Diamond" package from his ISP that ensures he has guaranteed high-bandwidth connection, John's ISP does not offer anything other than regular residential service. John must compete with everyone else in his local area for bandwidth, including a few who constantly watch high-definition video-on-demand and subsequently constrain bandwidth for other users. Would it not …