Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp
A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp
ExpressO
The trend of the eminent domain reform and "Kelo plus" initiatives is toward a comprehensive Constitutional property right incorporating the elements of level of review, nature of government action, and extent of compensation. This article contains a draft amendment which reflects these concerns.
Our Sovereign Body: Narrating The Fiction Of Sovereign Immunity In The Supreme Court: Part I-A English Stories, Marc L. Roark
Our Sovereign Body: Narrating The Fiction Of Sovereign Immunity In The Supreme Court: Part I-A English Stories, Marc L. Roark
ExpressO
This is part I-A of a Book I am working towards on the narratives and fictions of sovereign immunity. The goal in this part is to look before the American republic and towards the background in which American Sovereignty came to be shaped by -- the feudal notion of the sovereign; the Lockean response, and the Blackstonean doctrine. The first part looks at the legal fictions surrounding the kingship, their sources and their effects. The Second part looks to the specific ways of treating the sovereign in law, namely viewing King as Property owner or patriarch, Trustee, and Constitution.
Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor
Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor
ExpressO
No abstract provided.
The Police Power Revisited: Phantom Incorporation And The Roots Of The Takings Muddle, Bradley C. Karkkainen
The Police Power Revisited: Phantom Incorporation And The Roots Of The Takings Muddle, Bradley C. Karkkainen
ExpressO
This article traces the roots of the current muddle in the Supreme Court’s regulatory takings jurisprudence to an ill-considered “phantom incorporation” holding in Penn Central v. New York (1978), the seminal case of the modern regulatory takings era. The Penn Central Court anachronistically misread a long line of Fourteenth Amendment Substantive Due Process cases as Fifth Amendment Takings Clause cases, misattributing to Chicago Burlington & Quincy v. Chicago (1897) (“Chicago B & Q”) the crucial holding that the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause applied to the states. Like other cases of its era, Chicago B & Q was decided strictly on …