Law Commons^™

A Requiem For Regulatory Takings: Reclaiming Eminent Domain For Constitutional Property Claims, Danaya C. Wright

Danaya C. Wright

For the past forty years, the United States Supreme Court has embraced the doctrine of regulatory takings, despite being unable to provide any coherent and reliable guidance on when a regulation goes so far as to require compensation. But Justice Thomas's admission in Murr v. Wisconsin (2017) that there is no real historical basis for the Court's regulatory takings jurisprudence offers a chance to reconsider the doctrine anew. Looking back to Justice Holmes's prophetic statement in Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, that a regulation can go too far and require an exercise of eminent domain to sustain it, I argue …

Property-As-Society, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Timothy M. Mulvaney

Modern regulatory takings disputes present a key battleground for competing conceptions of property. This Article offers the following account of the three leading theories: a libertarian view sees property as creating a sphere of individual freedom and control (property-as-liberty); a pecuniary view sees property as a tool of economic investment (property-as-investment); and a progressive view sees property as serving a wide range of evolving communal values that include, but are not limited to, those advanced under both the libertarian and pecuniary conceptions (property-as-society). Against this backdrop, the Article offers two contentions. First, on normative grounds, it asserts that the conception …

Non-Enforcement Takings, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Timothy M. Mulvaney

The non-enforcement of existing property laws is not logically separable from the issue of unfair and unjust state deprivations of property rights at which the Constitution's Takings Clause takes aim. This Article suggests, therefore, that takings law should police allocations resulting from non-enforcement decisions on the same "fairness and justice" grounds that it polices allocations resulting from decisions to enact and enforce new regulations. Rejecting the extant majority position that state decisions not to enforce existing property laws are categorically immune from takings liability is not to advocate that persons impacted by such decisions should be automatically or even regularly …

Insuring Takings Claims, Christopher Serkin

Christopher Serkin

Local governments typically insure themselves against all kinds of losses, from property damage to legal liability. For small- and medium-sized governments, this usually means purchasing insurance from private insurers or participating in municipal risk pools. Insurance for regulatory takings claims, however, is generally unavailable. This previously unnoticed gap in municipal insurance coverage could lead risk averse local governments to underregulate and underenforce existing regulations where property owners threaten to bring takings claims. This seemingly technical observation turns out to have profound implications for theoretical accounts of the Takings Clause that focus on government regulatory incentives. This Article explores the impact …

The New Nuisance: An Antidote To Wetland Loss, Sprawl, And Global Warming, Christine A. Klein

Christine A. Klein

Marking the fifteenth anniversary of Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council -- the modern U.S. Supreme Court's seminal regulatory takings decision -- this Article surveys Lucas's impact upon regulations that restrict wetland filling, sprawling development, and the emission of greenhouse gases. The Lucas Court set forth a new categorical rule of governmental liability for regulations that prohibit all economically beneficial use of land, but also established a new defense that draws upon the states' common law of nuisance and property. Unexpectedly, that defense has taken on a life of its own -- forming what this Article calls the new …

California Supreme Court Unanimously Upholds Inclusionary Zoning As Land Use Regulation And Not An Exaction, Tim Iglesias

Tim Iglesias

Local governments, housing advocates, and people who need affordable housing won a solid victory in the California Supreme Court's unanimous opinion in California Bldg. Indus. Ass'n v. City of San Jose. In a complex 64-page opinion that is clearly drafted and rigorously argued, the court held that inclusionary zoning is a constitutionally permissible strategy to produce affordable housing and to promote economic integration that is subject to rational basis review and not heightened scrutiny.

This article outlines the factual and legal background of the case and discusses the court's reasoning in reaching its decision, including the court's refusal to find …

Ten Years Of Takings, Gregory Alexander

Gregory S Alexander

No area of property law has been more controversial in the past decade than takings. No aspect of constitutional law more sharply poses the dilemma about the legitimate powers of the regulatory state than the just compensation question. No question concerning constitutional property is more intractable than what sorts of government regulatory actions constitute uncompensated "takings" of private property. Limitations of space, not to mention my own ambivalence about many of the issues, prevent me from developing a complete normative theory of the proper scope of the Takings Clause. My aim here is vastly more modest: to outline the basic …

The Brooding Omnipresence Of Regulatory Takings: Urban Origins And Effects, Michael Allan Wolf

Michael A Wolf

This essay, written on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the Fordham Urban Law Journal, discusses the urban settings for key regulatory takings decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, reviews the state of expert commentary before the rebirth of regulatory takings in the high court, explores the complex relationship between liberal justices and private property rights protection, reviews regulatory takings scholarship that has appeared in the pages of this journal, and closes with some thoughts about the future of urban regulatory takings

Strategies For Making Sea-Level Rise Adaptation Tools 'Takings-Proof', Michael Allan Wolf

Michael A Wolf

While the costs of some Sea-Level Rise (SLR) adaptation tools are undeniably daunting, the American legal system poses an additional, potentially budget-busting impediment — the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Officials at all governmental strata and from all three branches should keep the demands made by the Takings Clause, as interpreted by the judiciary, in mind as they choose tools from the diverse SLR-adaptation toolbox, as they justify their choices to the electorate and other constituencies, as they put those tools to use, and as they defend that use from litigants claiming abuse. This …

Exactions Creep, Lee Anne Fennell, Eduardo M. PeñAlver

Eduardo M. Peñalver

The published version of this article is available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/facpub/1409/. How can the Constitution protect landowners from government exploitation without disabling the machinery that protects landowners from each other? The Supreme Court left this central question unanswered — and indeed unasked — in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District. The Court’s exactions jurisprudence, set forth in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, Dolan v. City of Tigard, and now Koontz, requires the government to satisfy demanding criteria for certain bargains — or proposed bargains — implicating the use of land. Yet because virtually every restriction, fee, or tax associated …

Constitutional Limitations On Sovereignty, 2014 Edition, Garrett Power

Garrett Power

This electronic book is published in a searchable PDF format as a part of the E-scholarship Repository of the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law. It is an “open content” casebook intended for classroom use in courses in Constitutional Law, Land Use Control, and Environmental Law. It consists of 130 odd judicial opinions (most rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court) carefully selected from the two hundred years of American constitutional history which address the clash between public sovereignty and private property. The text considers both the personal right to liberty and the personal right in property.

The …

"No Taking Without A Touching?" Questions From An Armchair Originalist, Nicole Stelle Garnett

Nicole Stelle Garnett

This paper is an invited contribution to the Bernard Siegan Memorial Conference on Economic Liberties, Property Rights, and the Original Meaning of the Constitution at the University of San Diego School of Law. The paper poses three questions about the historical evidence used to support the dominant academic view that the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause, as originally understood, extended only to physical appropriations or invasions of private property. First, the paper questions the relevance of state and local regulatory practices to the pre-incorporation understanding of the Takings Clause. Second, the paper expresses concern about the use of state-court cases decided …

Ensuring Continuing Community Amenities Through Golf Course Redevelopment, Patricia E. Salkin

Patricia E. Salkin

This article examines some of the issues faced by municipalities hoping to preserve their golf courses or to ensure their strategic redevelopment and focuses on how local governments can most effectively employ planning and zoning techniques to ensure that community amenities, including affordable housing and recreational areas, are an important part of golf course redevelopment projects.

Constitutional Limitations On Land Use Controls, Environmental Regulations And Governmental Exactions, 2013 Edition, Garrett Power

Garrett Power

This electronic book is published in a searchable PDF format as a part of the E-scholarship Repository of the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law. It is an “open content” casebook intended for classroom use in courses in Constitutional Law, Land Use Control, and Environmental Law and. It consists of 130 odd judicial opinions (most rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court) carefully selected from the two hundred years of American constitutional history which address the clash between public sovereignty and private property. The text considers both the personal right to liberty and the personal right in property. …

Regulatory Takings: Survey Of A Constitutional Culture, James Valvo

James Valvo

Fifth Amendment property protections under the Takings Clause have grown increasingly contentious as governing entities have used regulations to limit what property owners can do with their land. This paper profiles regulatory takings jurisprudence from Pennsylvania Coal, to Penn Central, to Nollan and Dolan, and Tahoe-Sierra. The paper also examines conceptual constructs that have shaped the field’s evolution, including: the doctrine’s origin, the nuisance exception, the changed circumstances argument, unconstitutional conditions, temporary takings and the denominator problem.

Ho Tung Gardens Saga And The Basis Of Compensation Under The Antiquities And Monuments Ordinance: A Comparative And Incentive Case Study On Regulatory Takings, Jianlin Chen

Jianlin Chen

Regulatory schemes that mandate historical preservation for private property are increasingly common. This article employs the attempt to preserve Ho Tung Gardens as a case study to examine problems in the design of compensation measures for such schemes. The compensation provision of Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap 53) is ambiguously worded, and this article argues that this Ordinance provides compensation only for the additional costs associated with the maintenance of historical buildings and does not compensate owners for property value depreciation. However, this article also argues from an incentive perspective that adequate compensation should be provided to property owners for …

Framing Inclusionary Zoning: Exploring The Legality Of Local Inclusionary Zoning And Its Potential To Meet Affordable Housing Needs, Tim Iglesias

Tim Iglesias

Whether local inclusionary zoning (IZ) ordinances can make significant contributions towards meeting affordable housing needs depends in large part on its legality. Courts have not developed a consistent jurisprudence regarding IZ ordinances. The legality of IZ ordinances depends upon how they are framed by the governments who enact them, the opponents who challenge them, and the courts that decide the cases. After a brief introduction, this article explores why framing is possible and likely in judicial review of IZ as well as why it matters. Next, the article analyzes the case law to demonstrate how framing has operated to affect …

Curbside Service: Community Land Use Catalysts To Neighborhood Flowering During Transit Installations, Michael N. Widener

Michael N. Widener

This article begins with this simple proposition: An infill transit construction project’s work destroys businesses in its right-of-way, pavement-chewing path. Transit construction’s collateral damage dislocates neighborhoods and unravels the social fabric of a community as locally established business operations fail. This article explains how cities with transit projects currently attempt solutions to the problem like rendering “marketing and social networking” advice and founding “business alliances” – and why cities fall short of their goal to stave off merchant failures. It next explains why merchant claims against cities asserting nuisance or regulatory takings are doomed to failure – and how cities …

Penn Central After 35 Years: A Three-Part Balancing Test Or A One-Strike Rule?, R. S. Radford

R. S. Radford

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York has been called the “polestar” of regulatory taking jurisprudence. Yet after 35 years, there is still no consensus on whether Penn Central sets forth a three-part balancing test, or a "one strike, you're out" checklist. This article presents an empirical analysis of how Penn Central is actually applied in the federal courts, finding distinct differences in the application of the test across jurisdictions.

Measure 37 And A Spoonful Of Kelo: A Recipe For Property Rights Activists At The Ballot Box, Patricia E. Salkin, Amy Lavine

Patricia E. Salkin

No abstract provided.

Property Rights, The "Gang Of Four" & The Fifth Vote: Stop The Beach From Renourishment, Inc. V. Florida Department Of Environmental Protection (U.S. Supreme Court 2010), Garrett Power

Garrett Power

In 2010 The U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (SBR v. Fla. EPA). Justice Antonin Scalia announced the judgment of the Court. All Justices agreed that Florida had not violated the Takings Clause of the Federal Constitution’s Fifth Amendment. But then in a plurality opinion Justice Scalia joined by the Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas and Alito proposed profound changes in the law of “regulatory takings.” As the spokesman for the Court’s property rights absolutists Scalia advanced two novel legal propositions. First he argued that federal courts had …

Constitutional Limitations On Land Use Controls, Environmental Regulations And Governmental Exactions (2011 Edition), Garrett Power

Garrett Power

This electronic book is published in a searchable PDF format as a part of the E-scholarship Repository of the University of Maryland School of Law. It is an “open content” casebook intended for classroom use in courses in Land Use Control, Environmental Law and Constitutional Law. It consists of cases carefully selected from the two hundred years of American constitutional history which address the clash between public sovereignty and private property. It considers both the personal right to liberty and the personal right in property. The text consists of non-copyrighted material and readers are free to use it or re-mix …

More Questions Than Answers: Situating Judicial Takings Within Existing Regulatory Takings Doctrine, Michael B. Kent Jr.

Michael B. Kent Jr.

In Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, a four-member plurality of the Supreme Court endorsed the idea that certain judicial action, as well as action by other branches of government, might effect a taking of private property. In explaining its theory of judicial takings, however, the plurality did little to explain how such takings fit within the larger doctrinal and analytical framework for regulatory takings. This essay evaluates whether the plurality’s discussion of judicial takings is consistent with the preexisting takings framework and how it might impact takings cases in the future. Ultimately, the plurality’s …

Constitutional Limitations On Land Use Controls, Environmental Regulations And Governmental Exactions (2010 Ed.), Garrett Power

Garrett Power

This electronic book is published in a searchable PDF format as a part of the E-scholarship Repository of the University of Maryland School of Law. It is an “open content” casebook intended for classroom use in courses in Land Use Control, Environmental Law and Constitutional Law. It consists of cases carefully selected from the two hundred years of American constitutional history which address the clash between public sovereignty and private property. It considers both the personal right to liberty and the personal right in property. The text consists of non-copyrighted material and readers are free to use it or re-mix …

Theoretical Tension And Doctrinal Discord: Analyzing Development Impact Fees As Takings, Michael B. Kent Jr.

Michael B. Kent Jr.

One of the lingering questions about the law of regulatory takings concerns the proper scope and application of the Supreme Court’s exactions jurisprudence, known as the Nollan/Dolan test. A recurring issue in the case law, and of particular importance to this article, is the extent to which the Nollan/Dolan framework applies to takings challenges brought against development impact fees.

By and large, the decisions on the issue split over two primary questions. First, there is a debate about whether Nollan/Dolan is limited to physical exactions or whether the test might also apply to monetary exactions as well. Second, there is …

The Stubborn Incoherence Of Regulatory Takings, Mark Fenster

Mark Fenster

Of All Things Made In America Why Are We Exporting The Penn Central Test?, Anthony B. Sanders

Anthony B Sanders

Developing countries enter into bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in order to increase foreign direct investment (FDI). Ignoring this straight forward fact has lead to a great deal of confusion in the assessment of BITs and their protection of regulatory takings. This Article addresses the question of how a BIT should approach regulatory takings with the purpose of increasing FDI in mind. It explores the background of the United States Supreme Court’s Penn Central test and the test’s incorporation into the post-NAFTA round of U.S. BITs. Then, the Article examines whether an uncertain and flexible test such as Penn Central is …

Construing The Canon: An Exegesis Of Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence After Lingle V. Chevron, Michael B. Kent Jr.

Michael B. Kent Jr.

Regulatory takings has long been considered one of the more confused areas of constitutional analysis. Since the Supreme Court's opinion in Penn Central Transportation Company v. City of New York, the law of regulatory takings has been characterized by varying analytical tests, competing theories, seemingly results-oriented decision-making, and a conflation with the law of substantive due process. In 2005, however, the Court made substantial strides in bringing some clarity to this area with its decision in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. In that case, the Court unanimously rejected the substantially advances test, demonstrating a rare willingness to discard prior precedent …

Mississippi River Stories: Lessons From A Century Of Floods And Hurricanes, Sandra Zellmer, Christine Klein

Sandi Zellmer

n the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the nation pondered how a relatively weak Category 3 storm could have destroyed an entire region. Few appreciated the extent to which a flawed federal water development policy transformed this apparently natural disaster into a “manmade” disaster; fewer still appreciated how the disaster was the predictable, and indeed predicted, sequel to almost a century of similar disasters. This article focuses upon three such stories: the Great Flood of 1927, the Midwest Flood of 1993, and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita of 2005. Taken together, the stories reveal important lessons, including the inadequacy of engineered flood …

The Benchmark Of Expectations: Regulatory Takings And Surface Coal Mining, Darren Botello-Samson

Darren Botello-Samson

In 2006, the United States Court of Federal Claims issued a decision in BENCHMARK RESOURCES CORPORATION v. UNITED STATES, a case involving a regulatory takings challenge to enforcement of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), a federal law regulating the environmental effects of surface coal mining. Such cases are not rare, as the Claims Court has visited this question on a number of occasions. The ruling in BENCHMARK did not depart from the federal judiciary's doctrine on SMCRA takings cases. The ruling is worth noting, however, for the ways in which it highlights the key aspects of a …