Law Commons^™

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 …

Murr V. Wisconsin And The Inherent Limits Of Regulatory Takings, Lynda L. Butler

Faculty Publications

This article examines the confusion surrounding constitutional protection of property under the substantive due process and takings clauses, using Murr as a springboard for reconsidering the substantive due process/takings distinction and asking whether the regulatory takings doctrine should remain a viable constitutional concept despite its muddled principles. While powerful reasons support treating as compensable economic regulations that are functionally equivalent to physical takings, important differences between physical and regulatory takings need to be recognized as limits to the degree of equivalence possible and therefore to the regulatory takings doctrine. A look back at the evolutionary paths of substantive due process, …

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.

The Superior Solution To The “Denominator Problem” — Comparing The Majority And Dissent’S Property Benchmark Tests In Murr V. Wisconsin With A Focus On Property Owners’ Reasonable Expectations, Rosemary K. Mcguirk

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Horne Dilemma: Protecting Property's Richness And Frontiers, Lynda L. Butler

Faculty Publications

In a 2015 decision, the Supreme Court concluded that real and personal property should not be treated differently under the Takings Clause and that a government condition requiring raisin growers, in certain years, to reserve a percentage of their crop for the government to manage in noncompetitive venues was a per se physical taking. The decision to treat both real and personal property as equally worthy of protection under the Takings Clause has merit given the weak historical evidence suggesting stronger protection for land and the importance of personal property to income generation and capital development in a modern society. …

Land Use And Climate Change Bubbles: Resilience, Retreat, And Due Diligence, John R. Nolon

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

This Article examines events on the ground in several localities where climate change is lowering property values and analyzes how those changes in value can be reckoned with by regulators. It merges practices and principles of real estate transactions and finance with those of land use and environmental regulation.

Climate change is a planetary phenomenon whose environmental implications are far-reaching. Reports on climate change consequences increasingly focus on what is happening locally and presently, while speculation continues about long-term global consequences. In numerous communities, property values are declining because of repeated flooding, continued threats of storm surges, sustained high temperatures, …

The Florida Beach Case And The Road To Judicial Takings, Michael C. Blumm, Elizabeth B. Dawson

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

In Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld a state beach restoration project against landowner claims of an unconstitutional taking of the property. This result was not nearly as surprising as the fact that the Court granted certiorari on a case that turned on an obscure aspect of Florida property law: whether landowners adjacent to a beach had the rights to future accretions of sand and to maintain contact with the water.

The Court’s curious interest in the case was piqued by the landowners’ recasting the case from the regulatory taking …

Palazzolo, The Public Trust, And The Property Owner's Reasonable Expectations: Takings And The South Carolina Marsh Island Bridge Debate, Erin Ryan

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Drawing The Line Between Taxes And Takings: The Continuous Burdens Principle, And Its Broader Application, Eric Kades

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Majoritarian Theft In The Regulatory State, Or What's A Takings Clause For?, James Audley Mclaughlin

William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review

No abstract provided.