Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Passive Takings: The State's Affirmative Duty To Protect Property, Christopher Serkin Dec 2014

Passive Takings: The State's Affirmative Duty To Protect Property, Christopher Serkin

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause is to protect property owners from the most significant costs of legal transitions. Paradigmatically, a regulatory taking involves a government action that interferes with expectations about the content of property rights. Legal change has therefore always been central to regulatory takings claims. This Article argues that it does not need to be and that governments can violate the Takings Clause by failing to act in the face of a changing world. This argument represents much more than a minor refinement of takings law because recognizing governmental liability for failing to act means …


Is Land Special? The Unjustified Preference For Landownership In Regulatory Takings Law, Eduardo M. Peñalver Nov 2014

Is Land Special? The Unjustified Preference For Landownership In Regulatory Takings Law, Eduardo M. Peñalver

Eduardo M. Peñalver

This article critiques the Court's attempt to cabin the Lucas "per se" takings rule by limiting it to real property. It argues that the distinction between real and personal property cannot be justified by history or the differing expectations of property owners. It then applies five theoretical frameworks (libertarian, personhood, utilitarian, public choice, and Thomistic-Aristotelian natural law) and finds that none of them supports the jurisprudential distinction between real and personal property. As a result, the article argues that "because the distinction between personal and real property is an unprincipled one, it cannot save the Court from the unpalatable implications …


Judicial Takings: Musings On Stop The Beach, James E. Krier Jan 2014

Judicial Takings: Musings On Stop The Beach, James E. Krier

Articles

Judicial takings weren’t much talked about until a few years ago, when the Stop the Beach case made them suddenly salient. The case arose from a Florida statute, enacted in 1961, that authorizes public restoration of eroded beaches by adding sand to widen them seaward. Under the statute, the state has title to any new dry land resulting from restored beaches, meaning that waterfront owners whose land had previously extended to the mean high-tide line end up with public beaches between their land and the water. This, the owners claimed, resulted in a taking of their property, more particularly their …


Land Use Impact Fees: Does Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District Echo An Arkansas Philosophy Of Property Rights?, Carl J. Circo Dec 2013

Land Use Impact Fees: Does Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District Echo An Arkansas Philosophy Of Property Rights?, Carl J. Circo

Carl J. Circo

The takings clause of the Arkansas Constitution declares that “the right of property is before and higher than any constitutional sanction.” Perhaps such an elevated regard for property is little more than a relic of the post-reconstruction South. But the philosophy seems surprisingly well aligned with a 2013 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District holds that the U.S. Constitution requires heightened scrutiny when a land use authority exacts an impact fee in exchange for a development permit. Koontz arguably reconceives the Court’s attitude toward routine land use regulation, implying a constitutionally favored …