Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Eminent Domain Economics: Should ‘Just Compensation’ Be Abolished, And Would ‘Takings Insurance’ Work Instead?, Steve Calandrillo
Eminent Domain Economics: Should ‘Just Compensation’ Be Abolished, And Would ‘Takings Insurance’ Work Instead?, Steve Calandrillo
Articles
In a defeat for staunch property rights advocates, the Supreme Court ruled this spring that a prohibition on land development in the Tahoe basin did not amount to a de facto taking of land such that the constitutional mandate of just compensation was triggered. The Tahoe decision highlights the struggle in eminent domain jurisprudence over the proper treatment of so-called regulatory takings. It has long been taken for granted that when the government exercises its power of eminent domain to take private property in the name of the public good, it must reimburse displaced landowners. While compensation for physical takings …
A Second Take: Re-Examining Our Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence Post-Tahoe, Robert W. Diubaldo
A Second Take: Re-Examining Our Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence Post-Tahoe, Robert W. Diubaldo
Fordham Urban Law Journal
This Note discusses the aftermath of the landmark case, Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agencey. This Comment first discusses the background of regulatory takings jurisprudence, from Justice Holmes' landmark Pennsylvania Coal opinion to the present. It further analyzes the recent Tahoe decision, focusing on both the strengths and weaknesses of the decision and its potential impact on the future of takings. Finally, the Comment offers a different analytical framework from which to analyze regulatory takings. Under this theory, courts would abandon the partial/total distinction, and instead focus on the actual loss from the landowner's point of view. …