Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Conceptual severance (2)
- Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (2)
- Nollan-Dolan doctrine (2)
- Takings clause (2)
- Takings doctrine (2)
-
- Takings jurisprudence (2)
- APA (1)
- Administrative Procedure Act (1)
- Article III (1)
- Delegated legislation (1)
- Dolan v. City of Tigard (1)
- Eminent domain (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles (1)
- Injury in fact (1)
- Jus tertii (1)
- Just compensation (1)
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission (1)
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council (1)
- Nondelegation (1)
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon (1)
- Post-modern takings (1)
- Public use clause (1)
- Redressability (1)
- Regulatory takings (1)
- Regulatory takings doctrine (1)
- Regulatory takings law (1)
- Separation of Powers (1)
- Standing doctrine (1)
- Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Public Law and Legal Theory
Deconstructing Nondelegation, Cynthia R. Farina
Deconstructing Nondelegation, Cynthia R. Farina
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
This Essay (part of the panel on "The Administrative State and the Constitution" at the 2009 Federalist Society Student Symposium) suggests that the persistence of debates over delegation to agencies cannot persuasively be explained as a determination finally to get constitutional law “right,” for nondelegation doctrine—at least as traditionally stated—does not rest on a particularly sound legal foundation. Rather, these debates continue because nondelegation provides a vehicle for pursuing a number of different concerns about the modern regulatory state. Whether or not one shares these concerns, they are not trivial, and we should voice and engage them directly rather than …
Blackletter Statement Of Federal Administrative Law: Standing, Cynthia R. Farina
Blackletter Statement Of Federal Administrative Law: Standing, Cynthia R. Farina
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Ten Years Of Takings, Gregory S. Alexander
Ten Years Of Takings, Gregory S. Alexander
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
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 …
"Takings" Jurisprudence In The U.S. Supreme Court: The Past 10 Years, Gregory S. Alexander
"Takings" Jurisprudence In The U.S. Supreme Court: The Past 10 Years, Gregory S. Alexander
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No area of American property law has been more controversial in recent years than the government regulation of uses of private property. No aspect of American constitutional law more sharply poses the dilemma about the legitimate powers of the regulatory state than the requirement that the government pay compensation for takings of property. The purpose of this essay is to acquaint the non-American legal scholar who is unfamiliar with the recent developments in the United States Supreme Court “takings” jurisprudence. The essay does not presuppose any background knowledge about either American constitutional or property law. Instead it attempts to familiarize …
Takings And The Post-Modern Dialectic Of Property, Gregory S. Alexander
Takings And The Post-Modern Dialectic Of Property, Gregory S. Alexander
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
Takings, Narratives, And Power, Gregory S. Alexander
Takings, Narratives, And Power, Gregory S. Alexander
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
"The Regulatory Takings Problem" is the title given to a story, or narrative, that has become prominent in the literature on just compensation issues. The story is one of power and fear. It is about a perceived imbalance of power between the two groups of actors involved in the process of public land-use regulation--private landowners and government regulators. It depicts scenarios of past or threatened abuse of power by local land-use regulators, and it looks to the takings clause generally and regulatory takings doctrine specifically as crucial corrective devices, essential to set the power imbalance aright. The dominant narrative describes …