Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Land use (2)
- Takings (2)
- Climate change (1)
- Detroit (1)
- Eminent domain (1)
-
- Environmental law (1)
- Environmental management (1)
- Environmental policy (1)
- Global warming (1)
- Government policy (1)
- Indian law (1)
- John Paul Stevens (1)
- Land use regulation (1)
- Massachusetts v. EPA (1)
- Native american law (1)
- Ohio (1)
- Public purpose doctrine (1)
- Sovereignty (1)
- Standing (1)
- State law (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Water pollution (1)
- Watershed management (1)
- Zoning (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Justice John Paul Stevens - His Take On Takings, Alan C. Weinstein
Justice John Paul Stevens - His Take On Takings, Alan C. Weinstein
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
This commentary reviews and analyzes Justice John Paul Stevens's role in shaping the Court's views on the takings issue in land use regulation.
Equal Standing With States: Tribal Sovereignty And Standing After Massachusetts V. Epa, Joseph Mead, Nicholas Fromherz
Equal Standing With States: Tribal Sovereignty And Standing After Massachusetts V. Epa, Joseph Mead, Nicholas Fromherz
All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications
In Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), the Supreme Court held that Massachusetts was entitled to "special solicitude" in the standing analysis because it was sovereign. As a result, Massachusetts passed the standing threshold in a global warming case where an ordinary litigant may have been stymied. The Supreme Court’s analysis raises an interesting question: Are Indian tribes—which have been considered sovereign entities since before the founding, and which hold lands facing heavy environmental pressure—entitled to "special solicitude" as well? We think they should be.
To make this argument, we begin by discussing standing basics; dissecting Massachusetts v. …
The Wholesale Decommissioning Of Vacant Urban Neighborhoods: Smart Decline, Public-Purpose Takings, And The Legality Of Shrinking Cities, Ben Beckman
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note is principally concerned with those takings that arise from the State's exercise of eminent domain, either directly or through the State's designee. To put a finer point on it, this Note addresses the distinction that property-rights advocates have developed to delegitimize certain types of takings. This distinction divides condemnations into disfavored-yet-legitimate takings-the direct-government-use and common-carrier takings-and ostensibly illegitimate public-purpose takings. The property-rights movement unequivocally places economic-development takings in the illegitimate category. The status of blight-remediation takings is ambiguous but tends toward legitimacy.
Crossing The Home-Rule Boundaries Should Be Mandatory: Advocating For A Watershed Approach To Zoning And Land Use In Ohio, Melanie Shwab
Crossing The Home-Rule Boundaries Should Be Mandatory: Advocating For A Watershed Approach To Zoning And Land Use In Ohio, Melanie Shwab
Cleveland State Law Review
This Article advocates that Ohio adopt a mandatory “watershed-approach” to land use planning and zoning throughout the state. Ohio should adopt this approach to increase water quality in the state by reducing nonpoint source pollution, achieve greater environmental regulation uniformity, and offset the unfettered zoning power of municipalities operating in the absence of a comprehensive plan.