Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (229)
- University of Colorado Law School (125)
- University of Michigan Law School (117)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (45)
- Fordham Law School (41)
-
- BLR (29)
- DePaul University (26)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (25)
- West Virginia University (24)
- William & Mary Law School (24)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (23)
- University of Maine School of Law (22)
- Cornell University Law School (21)
- Georgetown University Law Center (20)
- UIC School of Law (20)
- Columbia Law School (17)
- University at Buffalo School of Law (16)
- Pepperdine University (15)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (15)
- Brigham Young University Law School (13)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (11)
- Pace University (11)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (11)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (10)
- Brooklyn Law School (9)
- Cleveland State University (9)
- St. Mary's University (9)
- Florida State University College of Law (8)
- Roger Williams University (8)
- American University Washington College of Law (7)
- Keyword
-
- Property (91)
- Eminent domain (82)
- Takings (81)
- Fifth Amendment (79)
- Constitutional Law (65)
-
- Constitutional law (52)
- Takings Clause (52)
- Property rights (46)
- United States (45)
- Land use (42)
- Property-Personal and Real (42)
- Private property (41)
- Constitution (36)
- Compensation (34)
- Takings clause (34)
- Colorado (33)
- Public lands (32)
- Supreme Court (32)
- Property law (31)
- Due process (27)
- Public use (27)
- California (26)
- Fifth amendment (26)
- Just compensation (26)
- Zoning (26)
- BLM (24)
- Eminent Domain (24)
- Regulatory takings (24)
- FLPMA (23)
- U.S. Bureau of Land Management (22)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (202)
- Michigan Law Review (107)
- Faculty Scholarship (45)
- Touro Law Review (36)
- Fordham Environmental Law Review (30)
-
- The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8) (28)
- DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal (26)
- ExpressO (26)
- Seattle Journal for Social Justice (25)
- West Virginia Law Review (23)
- Regulatory Takings and Resources: What Are the Constitutional Limits? (Summer Conference, June 13-15) (22)
- Maine Law Review (21)
- Water as a Public Resource: Emerging Rights and Obligations (Summer Conference, June 1-3) (21)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (18)
- UIC Law Review (18)
- Western Water Law in Transition (Summer Conference, June 3-5) (18)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (16)
- Scholarly Works (16)
- Faculty Publications (15)
- Articles (14)
- Pepperdine Law Review (13)
- The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Summer Conference, June 6-8) (13)
- BYU Law Review (12)
- Buffalo Law Review (12)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (11)
- Supreme Court Case Files (10)
- Vanderbilt Law Review (10)
- Colorado Water Issues and Options: The 90's and Beyond: Toward Maximum Beneficial Use of Colorado's Water Resources (October 8) (9)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (9)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (8)
- Publication Type
Articles 421 - 450 of 1104
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
Israel's Absentee Property Law: When Is Democratic Failure Necessary?, Bria Smith
Israel's Absentee Property Law: When Is Democratic Failure Necessary?, Bria Smith
CMC Senior Theses
This paper defends Israel's expropriation of property under the Absentee Property Law within the state’s pre-1967 borders on constitutional grounds, but holds that the Law’s increased use in the region of East Jerusalem is invalid under Israel's constitutional scheme. This distinction turns upon the state’s application of the Law for necessary purposes. I hold that Israel’s justification for breaching human rights explicitly protected must be based on the state’s need to preserve its foundational ideology and national purpose in times of extra-normal circumstances. Israel may act undemocratically only to the extent imperative to preserve the Jewish nation and the existence …
A Prudential Take On A Prudential Takings Doctrine, Katherine Mims Crocker
A Prudential Take On A Prudential Takings Doctrine, Katherine Mims Crocker
Faculty Scholarship
The Supreme Court is set to decide a case requesting reconsideration of a doctrine that has long bedeviled constitutional litigants and commentators. The case is Knick v. Township of Scott, and the doctrine is the “ripeness” rule from Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank that plaintiffs seeking to raise takings claims under the Fifth Amendment must pursue state-created remedies first — the so-called “compensation prong” (as distinguished from a separate “takings prong”). This Essay argues that to put the compensation prong in the best light possible, the Court should view the requirement as a “prudential” rule rather than …
Non-Enforcement Takings, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Non-Enforcement Takings, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Faculty Scholarship
The non-enforcement of existing property laws is not logically separable from the issue of unfair and unjust state deprivations of property rights at which the Constitution's Takings Clause takes aim. This Article suggests, therefore, that takings law should police allocations resulting from non-enforcement decisions on the same "fairness and justice" grounds that it polices allocations resulting from decisions to enact and enforce new regulations. Rejecting the extant majority position that state decisions not to enforce existing property laws are categorically immune from takings liability is not to advocate that persons impacted by such decisions should be automatically or even regularly …
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Herr V. U.S. Forest Service, Peter B. Taylor
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Herr v. U. S. Forest Service, the Sixth Circuit ruled on whether the Forest Service could infringe on pre-existing private property rights held adjacent to a designated Wilderness Area. The Herrs purchased lakefront property adjacent to the Sylvania Wilderness in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan with the intention of using their littoral rights for recreational boating. The Sylvania Wilderness was created under the Michigan Wilderness Act in 1987, but the Act observed valid existing rights. The court found that the Herrs’ littoral rights were recognizable “valid existing rights.” Therefore, the Forest Service’s restriction of those rights was illegal.
Decision-Making And The Shaky Property Foundations Of Municipal Bankruptcy Law, Juliet M. Moringiello
Decision-Making And The Shaky Property Foundations Of Municipal Bankruptcy Law, Juliet M. Moringiello
Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law
Municipal bankruptcies are unpredictable. There are several reasons for this statement— municipal bankruptcies are rare, involvement of the state itself in the process varies according to the governing state law, and chapter 9, the Bankruptcy Code chapter governing the municipal bankruptcy process, has many gaps. Congress constructed the modern chapter 9 on a foundation of corporate bankruptcy law, a foundation whose roots—corporate finance—are significantly different from the rules governing municipal finance. In this Article, Professor Moringiello aims a spotlight on the property roots of private bankruptcy law and compares them to the promissory and statutory roots of municipal finance law …
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. V. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency: The Reemergence Of Penn Central And A Healthy Reluctance To Craft Per Se Regulatory Takings Rules, Philip R. Saucier
Maine Law Review
In Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, the Supreme Court held that a moratorium on development imposed during the process of devising a comprehensive land use plan did not constitute a per se taking of property requiring compensation under the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution. The scope of Tahoe-Sierra, and thus its ultimate impact on Supreme Court takings jurisprudence, had been severely narrowed and redefined by the courts since the landowners first alleged a taking over fifteen years before the issue was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court. It is important to note that this …
Equalizing Exactions, Sarah Schindler
Equalizing Exactions, Sarah Schindler
Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship
Some exactions are just bad. By this, I mean that they fail to mitigate the harms they were created to internalize. This struck me recently while I was researching privately owned public open spaces (POPOS), which are often exacted in exchange for a density bonus. Through my research, I determined that POPOS often fail to achieve the goals of good public space, in part because they are often exclusionary. I found myself wondering whether the citizens who were stuck with new dense buildings that block light and air, and who received only a poorly functioning POPOS in exchange, had any …
Kelo V. City Of New London-Wrongly Decided And A Missed Opportunity For Principled Line Drawing With Respect To Eminent Domain Takings, Orlando E. Delogu
Kelo V. City Of New London-Wrongly Decided And A Missed Opportunity For Principled Line Drawing With Respect To Eminent Domain Takings, Orlando E. Delogu
Maine Law Review
No eminent domain taking case in the last twenty-five years has excited the level of interest, attention, and debate as has Kelo v. City of New London. The Supreme Court’s decision has not quelled that debate. If anything the stridency, the emotional tenor, of the debate has increased. And in the few months since the decision came down, several dozen states (in the absence of any meaningful federal limitation on what constitutes “public use”) have proposed statutes or constitutional amendments that would limit their exercise of eminent domain (taking) powers. There is even talk of federal legislation to temper, to …
A Proposal For Establishing Specialized Federal And State "Takings Courts", John Martinez
A Proposal For Establishing Specialized Federal And State "Takings Courts", John Martinez
Maine Law Review
Takings doctrine is a mess. Let's just accept that and establish specialized federal and state "takings courts" to adjudicate takings claims. Takings claims arise when governmental conduct is alleged to detrimentally affect private property. Adjudication of takings claims may initially seem straightforward: the Fifth Amendment's Just Compensation Clause, as well as analogous state constitutional provisions, plainly provide that the government shall not take private property for public use without just compensation. In 1978, the United States Supreme Court confessed that takings analysis is hopelessly ad hoc. Decades later, in 2005, the Court abrogated a test for takings that it had …
God's Green Earth? The Environmental Impacts Of Religious Land Use, Kellen Zale
God's Green Earth? The Environmental Impacts Of Religious Land Use, Kellen Zale
Maine Law Review
Boulder County, Colorado has been at the forefront of the environmental movement for decades. Starting with its citizens’ vote in 1967 to implement a tax specifically to preserve open space, the city has long been known for its progressive environmental policies. At the center of Boulder’s environmental protection efforts is a comprehensive system of land use regulations designed to mitigate the slow chokehold of ever-encroaching development on wetlands and open space, on groundwater and soils, and on wildlife and native species. Numerous communities across the country have followed Boulder’s much-praised model and enacted their own environmental zoning laws to protect …
The Total Takings Myth, Lynn E. Blais
The Total Takings Myth, Lynn E. Blais
Fordham Law Review
For almost thirty-five years, the U.S. Supreme Court has attempted to carve out a total takings doctrine within its regulatory takings jurisprudence. Most regulatory takings claims are evaluated under the “ad hoc” threefactor test first articulated in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York. Exceedingly few of these claims are successful. But the Court has identified certain categories of government actions that are compensable takings per se, otherwise known as total takings. This began in 1982 with Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., where the Court held that a land use ordinance requiring a landowner to …
Are Critical Area Buffers Unconstitutional? Demystifying The Doctrine Of Unconstitutional Conditions, Brian T. Hodges
Are Critical Area Buffers Unconstitutional? Demystifying The Doctrine Of Unconstitutional Conditions, Brian T. Hodges
Seattle Journal of Environmental Law
Washington’s cities and counties are increasingly demanding that owners of residential shoreline properties dedicate large, predetermined critical area buffers as a mandatory condition of any new development. Such demands, when imposed without regard to the specifics of the land use proposal, would appear to violate the essential nexus and rough proportionality tests established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994). Early decisions from Washington courts faithfully applied these tests, invalidating open space and buffer dedications. But in a series of …
Nationstar Mortg. V. Sfr Invs. Pool 1, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 34 (June 22, 2017), Elise Conlin
Nationstar Mortg. V. Sfr Invs. Pool 1, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 34 (June 22, 2017), Elise Conlin
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that a servicer of a loan that is owned by a regulated entity does have standing to raise claims on behalf of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. If a party argues that federal law preempts state law when a case is properly before the court, then the court has authority to determine that issue.
The New England Food System In 2060: Envisioning Tomorrow's Policy Through Today's Assessments, Margaret Sova Mccabe, Joanne Burke
The New England Food System In 2060: Envisioning Tomorrow's Policy Through Today's Assessments, Margaret Sova Mccabe, Joanne Burke
Maine Law Review
As the local food movement gains critical mass around the country, deep and important issues concerning food system policy arise. The modern American food system spans from agricultural production to food processing to food consumption, and finally, to health outcomes. The system’s components include economic, environmental, social, political, and scientific aspects that interact in ways that far outstrip any one discipline’s capacity to analyze and resolve problems. Additionally, the system is profoundly shaped by a complex architecture of laws and regulation. With much credit to the local and regional food movements, people have begun to question not only the current …
Penn Central Take Two, Christopher Serkin
Penn Central Take Two, Christopher Serkin
Notre Dame Law Review
Penn Central v. New York City is the most important regulatory takings case of all time. There, the Supreme Court upheld the historic preservation of Grand Central Terminal in part because the City offset the burden of the landmarking with a valuable new property interest—a transferable development right (TDR)—that could be sold to neighboring property. Extraordinarily, 1.2 million square feet of those very same TDRs, still unused for over forty years, are the subject of newly resolved takings litigation. According to the complaint, the TDRs that saved Grand Central were themselves taken by the government, which allegedly wiped out their …
Law And Policy Resource Guide: A Survey Of Eminent Domain Law In Texas And The Nation, Caitlyn Ashley, Elizabeth Spencer Berthiaume, Philip Berzin, Rikki Blassingame, Stephanie Bradley Fryer, John Cox, E. Samuel Crecelius, Taylor Dennington, Tave Doty, Stacie Dowell, Cameron Frysinger, Jordan Simmons Hayes, Alexandria Hutchison, Hillary Tidwell, Michael Vinson, George Wigington, Christopher Wilkes, Lola Wilson, Shane Wright
Law And Policy Resource Guide: A Survey Of Eminent Domain Law In Texas And The Nation, Caitlyn Ashley, Elizabeth Spencer Berthiaume, Philip Berzin, Rikki Blassingame, Stephanie Bradley Fryer, John Cox, E. Samuel Crecelius, Taylor Dennington, Tave Doty, Stacie Dowell, Cameron Frysinger, Jordan Simmons Hayes, Alexandria Hutchison, Hillary Tidwell, Michael Vinson, George Wigington, Christopher Wilkes, Lola Wilson, Shane Wright
EENRS Program Reports & Publications
Eminent Domain is the power of the government or quasi-government entities to take private or public property interests through condemnation. Eminent Domain has been a significant issue since 1879 when, in the case of Boom Company v. Patterson, the Supreme Court first acknowledged that the power of eminent domain may be delegated by state legislatures to agencies and non-governmental entities. Thus, the era of legal takings began.
Though an important legal dispute then, more recently eminent domain has blossomed into an enduring contentious social and political problem throughout the United States. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states, …
2016 Survey Of Rhode Island Law: Cases And Public Laws Of Note
2016 Survey Of Rhode Island Law: Cases And Public Laws Of Note
Roger Williams University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Faculty Scholarship
Exactions — a term used to describe certain conditions that are attached to land-use permits issued at the government’s discretion — ostensibly oblige property owners to internalize the costs of the expected infrastructural, environmental, and social harms resulting from development. This Article explores how proponents of progressive conceptions of property might respond to the open question of whether legislative exactions should be subject to the same level of judicial scrutiny to which administrative exactions are subject in constitutional takings cases. It identifies several first-order reasons to support the idea of immunizing legislative exactions from heightened takings scrutiny. However, it suggests …
An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings., James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk
An Empirical Study Of Implicit Takings., James E. Krier, Stewart E. Sterk
Articles
Takings scholarship has long focused on the niceties of Supreme Court doctrine, while ignoring the operation of takings law "on the ground" in the state and lower federal courts, which together decide the vast bulk of all takings cases. This study, based primarily on an empirical analysis of more than 2000 reported decisions ovcr the period 1979 through 2012, attempts to fill that void. This study establishes that the Supreme Court's categorical rules govern almost no state takings cases, and that takings claims based on government regulation almost invariably fail. By contrast, when takings claims arise out of government action …
Testimony On Unmanned Aircraft Systems Rules And Regulations, Stephen Henderson
Testimony On Unmanned Aircraft Systems Rules And Regulations, Stephen Henderson
Other Faculty Publications
Chairman Barrington, Vice Chair Brooks, members of the Committee on Public Safety, Senators, and distinguished guests, I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you today about unmanned aerial systems, or drones, and more particularly about their federal constitutional implications and what might be the constitutional restrictions on any legislation you might like to enact. I am the Judge Haskell A. Holloman Professor of Law at the University of Oklahoma, where my teaching and research focus on criminal law and procedure and privacy, including the constitutional rights pertaining thereto.My topic is not an easy one. The constitutional law is …
Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference Journal, Volume 5, William & Mary Law School
Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference Journal, Volume 5, William & Mary Law School
Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Journal
Property as a Form of Governance
October 1-2, 2015
Panel 1: Property as a Form of Governance
Panel 3: Of Pipelines, Drilling, & the Use of Eminent Domain
Panel 4: Property Rights in the Digital Age
Prostitution Policy: Legalization, Decriminalization And The Nordic Model, Ane Mathieson, Easton Branam, Anya Noble
Prostitution Policy: Legalization, Decriminalization And The Nordic Model, Ane Mathieson, Easton Branam, Anya Noble
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Don’T Risk It; Wait Until She’S Sober, Patrick John White
Don’T Risk It; Wait Until She’S Sober, Patrick John White
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Let’S Talk About Sex: A Call For Guardianship Reform In Washington State, Sage Graves
Let’S Talk About Sex: A Call For Guardianship Reform In Washington State, Sage Graves
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Living Under The Boot: Militarization And Peaceful Protest, Charlotte Guerra
Living Under The Boot: Militarization And Peaceful Protest, Charlotte Guerra
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Let’S Invest In People, Not Prisons: How Washington State Should Address Its Ex-Offender Unemployment Rate, Sara Taboada
Let’S Invest In People, Not Prisons: How Washington State Should Address Its Ex-Offender Unemployment Rate, Sara Taboada
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
His Feminist Facade: The Neoliberal Co-Option Of The Feminist Movement, Anjilee Dodge, Myani Gilbert
His Feminist Facade: The Neoliberal Co-Option Of The Feminist Movement, Anjilee Dodge, Myani Gilbert
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
In Her Words: Recognizing And Preventing Abusive Litigation Against Domestic Violence Survivors, David Ward
In Her Words: Recognizing And Preventing Abusive Litigation Against Domestic Violence Survivors, David Ward
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Persistence And Resistance: Women’S Leadership And Ending Gender-Based Violence In Guatemala, Serena Cosgrove, Kristi Lee
Persistence And Resistance: Women’S Leadership And Ending Gender-Based Violence In Guatemala, Serena Cosgrove, Kristi Lee
Seattle Journal for Social Justice
No abstract provided.
Mauna Kea Anaina Hou V. Board Of Land And Natural Resources, Wesley J. Furlong
Mauna Kea Anaina Hou V. Board Of Land And Natural Resources, Wesley J. Furlong
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Native Hawaiians and the scientific community have been pitted against each other in a decades-long culture war over the construction of observatories and telescopes on sacred landscapes. In Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, the Hawai’i Supreme Court handed a victory to Native Hawaiian culture and rights by halting the construction of a new telescope on Mauna Kea. The decision must be read cautiously, however, as it is firmly rooted in the strict application of procedural due process.