Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Cathedral Engulfed: Sea-Level Rise, Property Rights, And Time, J. Peter Byrne
The Cathedral Engulfed: Sea-Level Rise, Property Rights, And Time, J. Peter Byrne
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Sea-level rise will require many new initiatives in land use regulation to adapt to unprecedented climate conditions. Such government actions will prompt regulatory and other takings claims, and also will be shaped by apprehension of such claims. This article analyzes the categories of land use regulations and other government initiatives likely to be enacted to adapt to sea-level rise and anticipates the takings claims that may be brought against them. In addition to hard and soft coastal armoring, the article considers regulations intended to force or induce development to retreat from rising waters. Retreat regulations present difficult takings problems, because …
Eminent Domain And Racial Discrimination: A Bogus Equation, J. Peter Byrne
Eminent Domain And Racial Discrimination: A Bogus Equation, J. Peter Byrne
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This paper is a transcript of testimony by Professor J. Peter Byrne before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission on August 12, 2011.
This hearing addresses claims that the use of eminent domain for economic development unfairly and disproportionately harms racial and ethnic minorities. These claims draw on the history of urban renewal prior to the 1960’s, when many African Americans and others were displaced by publicly funded projects that bulldozed their homes in largely failed attempts to modernize cities. Justice Clarence Thomas’s dissent in Kelo v. City of New London further argued that the use of eminent domain for economic …
Supreme Neglect Of Text And History, William Michael Treanor
Supreme Neglect Of Text And History, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This article reviews Supreme Neglect: How to Revive Constitutional Protection for Private Property by Richard A. Epstein (2008).
In Supreme Neglect, Professor Richard Epstein has produced a clear and elegant synthesis for the general reader of his lifetime of thinking about the Takings Clause and, more broadly, about the role of property in our constitutional system. Appealing to both history and constitutional text, Epstein argues that the Takings Clause bars government regulations that diminish the value of private property (with the exception of a highly constrained category of police power regulations). This essay shows that neither the text of the …
Take-Ings, William Michael Treanor
Take-Ings, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The word property had many meanings in 1789, as it does today, and a critical aspect of the ongoing debate about the meaning of the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause has centered on how the word should be read in the context of the Clause. Property has been read by Professor Thomas Merrill to refer to "ownership" interests, by Richard Epstein in terms of a broad Blackstonian conception of the individual control of the possession, use, and disposition of resources, by Benjamin Barros as reflective of constructions through individual expectations and state law, and by the author as physical control of …
Condemnation Of Low Income Residential Communities Under The Takings Clause, J. Peter Byrne
Condemnation Of Low Income Residential Communities Under The Takings Clause, J. Peter Byrne
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
In Part 1 of this paper, I describe the evolution of interpretation of the "public use" clause that authorizes the use of eminent domain for urban redevelopment. In Part 2, I chart the effort to narrow the scope of public use in order to eliminate or police redevelopment by condemnation. In this part, I present and analyze the arguments for such reinterpretation and the new rules suggested for how public use should be understood. I also sketch the changing economic and political situation of cities that lead them to take this activist approach to positive economic planning. I conclude that …
Jam For Justice Holmes: Reassessing The Significance Of Mahon, William Michael Treanor
Jam For Justice Holmes: Reassessing The Significance Of Mahon, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
When courts and commentators discuss Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, they use the same word with remarkable regularity: famous. Mahon has achieved this fame in part because it was the occasion for conflict between judicial giants, and because the result seems ironic. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.--the great Lochner dissenter and a jurist generally considered a champion of judicial deference to legislatures in the sphere of economic decision-making--wrote the opinion striking down a Pennsylvania statute barring coal mining that could cause the surface to cave-in. Sharply dissenting from Holmes's opinion was his consistent ally on the Court, Justice Louis …
Understanding Mahon In Historical Context, William Michael Treanor
Understanding Mahon In Historical Context, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Despite its enormous influence on constitutional law, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon is just such an opinion; the primary purpose of the author’s article Jam for Justice Holmes: Reassessing the Significance of Mahon is to clarify Holmes's intent by placing the opinion in historical context and in the context of Holmes's other opinions. While other scholars have also sought to place Mahon in context, his account differs in large part because of its recognition, as part of the background of Mahon, of a separate line of cases involving businesses affected with a public interest.
The author argues that at …
The Original Understanding Of The Takings Clause And The Political Process, William Michael Treanor
The Original Understanding Of The Takings Clause And The Political Process, William Michael Treanor
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The original understanding of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment was clear on two points. The clause required compensation when the federal government physically took private property, but not when government regulations limited the ways in which property could be used. In 1922, however, the Supreme Court's decision in Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon established a new takings regime. In an opinion by Justice Holmes, the Court held that compensation must be provided when government regulation "goes too far" in diminishing the value of private property. Since that decision, the Supreme Court has been unable to define clearly what kind …