Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
What's Your Damage?! The Supreme Court Has Wrecked Temporary Takings Jurisprudence, Timothy M. Harris
What's Your Damage?! The Supreme Court Has Wrecked Temporary Takings Jurisprudence, Timothy M. Harris
Faculty Publications
In Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the U.S. Supreme Court unnecessarily expanded the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause. In doing so, the Court veered away from established precedent and overturned prior case law—without expressly admitting to doing so. In 2021, the Court held that a California law allowing access by union organizers to enter private property under certain conditions took away a landowner’s right to exclude others and was (apparently) immediately compensable under the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause. Prior law had subjected temporary takings to an uncertain, unpopular, and ambiguous balancing test—but the Cedar Point holding turned temporary takings jurisprudence on …
State Rejection Of Federal Law, Thomas B. Bennett
State Rejection Of Federal Law, Thomas B. Bennett
Faculty Publications
Sometimes the United States Supreme Court speaks, and states do not follow. For example, in 2003, the Arizona Supreme Court agreed to "reject" a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, because no "sound reasons justif[ied] following" it. Similarly, in 2006, Michigan voters approved a ballot initiative that, according to the legislature that drafted it, sought "at the very least to freeze' the state's ... law to prevent" state courts from following a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court. Surprising though this language may be, there is nothing nefarious about these cases. Cooper v. Aaron this is not. Unlike more notorious …
Are Beach Boundaries Enforceable? Real-Time Locational Uncertainty And The Right To Exclude, Josh Eagle
Are Beach Boundaries Enforceable? Real-Time Locational Uncertainty And The Right To Exclude, Josh Eagle
Faculty Publications
Over the past few decades, landowners have tried to use the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to fully privatize the upper, dry-sand part of the beach. If these efforts were to succeed, there would be a host of negative consequences, and not just for surfers. In most of the states in which beaches are economically important, including California, Florida, New Jersey and Texas, privatized dry sand would mean little to no public access at times when the public, wet-sand part of the beach is submerged, that is, in the hours immediately before and after high tides. Decreased beach use would …
Airspace And The Takings Clause, Troy A. Rule
Airspace And The Takings Clause, Troy A. Rule
Faculty Publications
This Article highlights several situations in which governments can impose height restrictions or other regulations as a way to effectively take negative airspace easements for their own benefit. The Article describes why current regulatory takings rules fail to adequately protect citizens against these situations and advocates a new rule capable of filling this gap in takings law. The new rule would clarify the Supreme Court’s takings jurisprudence as it relates to airspace and would promote more fair and efficient allocations of airspace rights between governments and private citizens.
Airspace And The Takings Clause, Troy A. Rule
Airspace And The Takings Clause, Troy A. Rule
Faculty Publications
This Article argues that the U.S. Supreme Court’s takings jurisprudence fails to account for instances when public entities restrict private airspace solely to keep it open for their own use. Many landowners rely on open space above adjacent land to preserve scenic views for their properties, to provide sunlight access for their rooftop solar panels, or to serve other uses that require no physical invasion of the neighboring space. Private citizens typically must purchase easements or covenants to prevent their neighbors from erecting trees or buildings that would interfere with these non-physical airspace uses. In contrast, public entities can often …
The Constitutional Failing Of The Anticybersquatting Act, Ned Snow
The Constitutional Failing Of The Anticybersquatting Act, Ned Snow
Faculty Publications
Eminent domain and thought control are occurring in cyberspace. Through the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), the government transfers domain names from domain-name owners to private parties based on the owners' bad-faith intent. The owners receive no just compensation. The private parties who are recipients of the domain names are trademark holders whose trademarks correspond with the domain names. Often the trademark holders have no property rights in those domain names: trademark law only allows mark holders to exclude others from making commercial use of their marks; it does not allow mark holders to reserve the marks for their own …
Palazzolo, Lucas, And Penn Central: The Need For Pragmatism, Symbolism, And Ad Hoc Balancing, F. Patrick Hubbard
Palazzolo, Lucas, And Penn Central: The Need For Pragmatism, Symbolism, And Ad Hoc Balancing, F. Patrick Hubbard
Faculty Publications
The constitutional right to compensation for a governmental taking of property is relatively easy to apply in situations involving a straightforward, physical appropriation of land for a public use like a highway. However, difficulties arise when governmental action consists only of rules that limit an owner's use of land. In most situations, these limits are viewed as burdens an individual is properly subject to as a citizen and land owner. From this perspective, the exercise of the "police power" of the government, which has traditionally been used to prohibit public and private harms, does not usually involve a taking of …
Transition Losses In The Electric Power Market: A Challenge To The Premises Underlying The Arguments For Compensation, Lois R. Lupica
Transition Losses In The Electric Power Market: A Challenge To The Premises Underlying The Arguments For Compensation, Lois R. Lupica
Faculty Publications
In this Article, Professor Lois R. Lupica examines whether the electric utility industry, currently j.n the midst of deregulation, ought to sustain the resulting transition losses. Due to the signifi· cant modification of legal rules affecting the electric power market and changes in regulatory policy, the utilities currently have expenditures and expectations that are unrecoverable in a competitive market. In recent years, momentum has moved in the direction of compensating the electric utilities and their investors for these losses. Professor Lupica challenges the arguments for transition loBS recovery and ultimately concludes that the doctrinal premises in support oftransition loss recovery …