Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Land Use Law (5)
- Property Law and Real Estate (5)
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
-
- Agriculture Law (1)
- Energy and Utilities Law (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Food and Drug Law (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Law and Race (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Natural Resources Law (1)
- President/Executive Department (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Tax Law (1)
- Taxation-State and Local (1)
- Water Law (1)
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
A Requiem For Regulatory Takings: Reclaiming Eminent Domain For Constitutional Property Claims, Danaya C. Wright
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 …
Defining Fishing, The Slippery Seaweed Slope, Ross V. Acadian Seaplants Ltd., Rebecca P. Totten
Defining Fishing, The Slippery Seaweed Slope, Ross V. Acadian Seaplants Ltd., Rebecca P. Totten
Ocean and Coastal Law Journal
In Maine, the intertidal zone has seen many disputes over its use, access, and property rights. Recently, in Ross v. Acadian Seaplants, Ltd., the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, held that rockweed seaweed in the intertidal zone is owned by the upland landowner and is not part of a public easement under the public trust doctrine. The Court held harvesting rockweed is not fishing. This case will impact private and public rights and also the balance between the State's environmental and economic interests. This Comment addresses the following points: first, the characteristics of rockweed and the …
Property-As-Society, Timothy M. Mulvaney
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 …
President Trump's Big Beautiful Wall: Discrimination, Eminent Domain, And The Public Use Requirement, Meghan K. Tierney
President Trump's Big Beautiful Wall: Discrimination, Eminent Domain, And The Public Use Requirement, Meghan K. Tierney
Chicago-Kent Law Review
At a press conference held in Trump Tower New York City on June 16, 2015, Donald Trump announced his candidacy for President of the United States by promising to expand the border wall along the Southern United States. President Trump has insisted that his only reasons behind completely separating the United States from Mexico are to curtail illegal immigration and curb drug cartel activity, but many argue that his statements indicate a much more sinister motive based in racial discrimination. The public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause allows the federal government to take private land for the …
A Requiem For Regulatory Takings: Reclaiming Eminent Domain For Constitutional Property Claims, Danaya C. Wright
A Requiem For Regulatory Takings: Reclaiming Eminent Domain For Constitutional Property Claims, Danaya C. Wright
UF Law Faculty Publications
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 …
Energy And Eminent Domain, James W. Coleman, Alexandra B. Klass
Energy And Eminent Domain, James W. Coleman, Alexandra B. Klass
Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
This Article examines the growing opposition to the use of eminent domain for energy transport projects such as oil pipelines, gas pipelines, and electric transmission lines. Such projects were protected from the state legislative reforms that restricted eminent domain following the Supreme Court’s controversial decision in Kelo v. City of New London in 2005 but are now under increased scrutiny. This Article evaluates why U.S. energy transport projects have become so controversial and suggests how states and the federal government should evaluate the need for eminent domain for these projects and enact appropriate reforms. We first detail the significant changes …
A Wall Of Hate: Eminent Domain And Interest-Convergence, Philip Lee
A Wall Of Hate: Eminent Domain And Interest-Convergence, Philip Lee
Faculty Publications
(Excerpt)
Donald Trump is no stranger to eminent domain. In the 1990s, Trump wanted land around Trump Plaza to build a limousine parking lot. Many of the private owners agreed to sell, but one elderly widow and two brothers who owned a small business refused. Trump then got a government agency—the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA)—to take the properties through eminent domain, offering them a quarter of what they had previously paid or been offered for their land.
The property owners fought back and finally won. Although the CRDA named several justifications, from economic development to traffic alleviation and additional …