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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

"Land Is Life, Land Is Power": Landlessness, Exclusion, And Deprivation In Nepal, Elisabeth Wickeri Jan 2011

"Land Is Life, Land Is Power": Landlessness, Exclusion, And Deprivation In Nepal, Elisabeth Wickeri

Crowley Mission Reports

Up to one quarter of the world’s poor is estimated to be landless, a condition that in rural areas is often the best predictor of poverty and hunger. Access to land and its resources, land tenure security, ownership and control over land, and the ability to dispose of land or transfer rights in land are necessary for the fulfillment of fundamental human rights, and are frequently tied to the indigenous, ethnic, and cultural identities of peoples. The social and economic impacts of landlessness, including hunger, threats to health, homelessness, and exploitative labor conditions, create conditions intensifying exploitation by both landowners …


Property's Morale , Nestor M. Davidson Jan 2011

Property's Morale , Nestor M. Davidson

Faculty Scholarship

A foundational argument long invoked to justify stable property rights is that property law must protect settled expectations. Respect for expectations unites otherwise disparate strands of property theory focused on ex ante incentives, individual identity, and community. It also privileges resistance to legal transitions that transgress reliance interests. When changes in law unsettle expectations, such changes are thought to generate disincentives that Frank Michelman famously labeled demoralization costs. Although rarely approached in these terms, arguments for legal certainty reflect underlying psychological assumptions about how people contemplate property rights when choosing whether and how to work, invest, create, bolster identity, join …


Gallenthin V. Kaur: A Comparative Analysis Of How The New Jersey And New York Courts Approach Judicial Review Of The Exercise Of Eminent Domain For Redevelopment, Ronald K. Chen Jan 2011

Gallenthin V. Kaur: A Comparative Analysis Of How The New Jersey And New York Courts Approach Judicial Review Of The Exercise Of Eminent Domain For Redevelopment, Ronald K. Chen

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article explores two explanations for why New Jersey and New York take different approaches to judicial review of exercises of eminent domain. Part I examines the approach of both states and their differing procedures for review of administrative agency determinations. Part II discusses how each states' courts and legislatures define "blight." Part III examines how New York's approach leaves municipal officials and redevelopers free to use the more flexible concept of "underutilization" as a proxy for "blight."


Public Use In The Dirigiste Tradition: Private And Public Benefit In An Era Of Agglomeration, Steven J. Eagle Jan 2011

Public Use In The Dirigiste Tradition: Private And Public Benefit In An Era Of Agglomeration, Steven J. Eagle

Fordham Urban Law Journal

Dirigisme is the "policy of state direction and control in economic and social matters. This Article examines dirigisme as it relates to state control of land use. It also analyzes the development of eminent domain law and the requirement that takings be for public use. The author argues that the New York Court of Appeals "subordinates constitutional protections for private property to centralized development," specifically examining the recent Goldstein and Kaur opinions. The Article also discusses the implications of condemnation for transfer for private redevelopment, including lack of transparency, secondary rent seeking, possibilities of corruption, and the inefficient use of …


The Problem With Pretext, Lynn E. Blais Jan 2011

The Problem With Pretext, Lynn E. Blais

Fordham Urban Law Journal

This Article examines the problems with the Supreme Court's holding in Kelo v. City of New London that the concept of public use is expansive unless the government is asserting the public use as a "mere pretext" and the true purpose is private benefit. The author examines the level of scrutiny applied in such cases, the link between pretext and motive, and the tests applied to evaluate pretext challenges: the burden-shifting motives test, the sufficiency of the plan taste, and the benefits to the public test. The author concludes that pretext is an "unworkable mechanism" for evaluating public use cases.