Law Commons^™

Kelo's Moral Failure, Laura S. Underkuffler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presented at the 2004 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference.

Takings: An Appreciative Retrospective, Eric R. Claeys

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Presented at the 2005 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference.

The Demise Of Federal Takings Litigation, Stewart E. Sterk

William & Mary Law Review

For more than twenty years the Supreme Court has held that a federal takings claim is not ripe until the claimant seeks compensation in state court. The Court's recent opinion in San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City & County of San Francisco establishes that the federal full faith and credit statute applies to federal takings claims. The Court itself recognized that its decision limits the availability of a federal forum for takings claims. In fact, however, claim preclusion doctrine-not considered or discussed by the Court-may result in more stringent limits on federal court review of takings claims than the Court's …

Time To Overturn Turney, Paul A. Lafata

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Privatizing Eminent Domain: The Delegation Of A Very Public Power To Private, Non-Profit And Charitable Corporations, Asmara Tekle Johnson

ExpressO

In an age of privatization of many governmental functions such as health care, prison management, and warfare, this Article poses the question as to whether eminent domain should be among them. Unlike other privatized functions, eminent domain is a traditionally governmental and highly coercive power, akin to the government’s power to tax, to arrest individuals, and to license. It is, therefore, a very public power.

In particular, the delegation of this very public power to private, non-profit and charitable corporations has escaped the scrutiny that for-profit private actors have attracted in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in …

Desperate Cities: Eminent Domain And Economic Development In A Post-Kelo World, Asmara Tekle Johnson

ExpressO

Kelo v. City of New London unleashed an unprecedented legislative response when the Court upheld the use of eminent domain for private economic development as consistent with the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. By exhibiting an extreme deference to the legislative branch and failing to consider the current model of economic development, in which “desperate” cities have seen their economic bases contract and have embarked on fervent urban revitalization campaigns as a result, the Kelo Court failed to take into account the immense influence that large corporate interests wield in the legislature. This influence is generally exercised to the …

Exactions And Burden Distribution In Takings Law, Carlos A. Ball, Laurie Reynolds

William & Mary Law Review

In the last several decades, there has been a marked shift in local government financing away from the use of general revenue taxes and toward nontax revenue-raising devices such as exactions. This Article argues that the Supreme Court, in its exaction cases, missed a golden opportunity to slow this troubling trend toward the greater privatization of local government financing. In addition, it explains how the Court's exaction cases are inconsistent with the goal of burden distribution as reflected in the Court's takings jurisprudence. The Article proposes that the constitutional standard applied to exactions be reformulated to account explicitly for burden …

The Robin Hood Antithesis – Robbing From The Poor To Give To The Rich: How Eminent Domain Is Used To Take Property In Violation Of The Fifth Amendment, Daniel C. Orlaskey

University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class

No abstract provided.