Property Law and Real Estate Commons^™

Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Federal-State Negotiations Over Federal Enclaves In The Early Republic, Adam S. Grace

ExpressO

This article examines practical solutions arrived at by the federal and state governments in resolving early interpretive issues that arose under Article I's "Enclave Clause." Focusing on the federal government's creation of federal "enclaves" for use in a national lighthouse system, the article compares these politically-based solutions with the later development of Supreme Court "Enclave Clause" jurisprudence.

Overcoming Poletown: County Of Wayne V. Hathcock, Economic Development Takings, And The Future Of Public Use, Ilya Somin

George Mason University School of Law Working Papers Series

County of Wayne v. Hathcock is an important step forward in public use takings law. The Michigan Supreme Court was right to overturn its notorious 1981 Poletown decision and forbid condemnations that transfer property to private parties solely on the grounds that the new owners will contribute to “economic development.” Poletown was the best known and most widely criticized decision justifying a nearly unlimited condemnation power.

As the Poletown case dramatically demonstrates, the economic development rationale is a virtual blank check for eminent domain abuse for the benefit of private parties. Poletown upheld a condemnation as a result of which …

The Rhetorics Of Takings Cases: It's Mine V. Let's Share, Susan Ayres

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

What Is A Tragedy Of The Commons? Overfishing And The Campaign Spending Problem, Shi-Ling Hsu

ExpressO

Over the thirty-seven years since its publication, Garden Hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons" has clearly become one of the most influential writings of all time. The tragedy of the commons is one of those rare scholarly ideas that has had an enormous impact in academia and is also commonly used outside of academia. In legal scholarship, the tragedy of the commons has been used to characterize a wide variety of resource problems, including intellectual property rights, overcrowding of telecommunications spectra, air and water pollution, and of course, the classic environmental commons problem, overfishing. But I suggest this embarrassment of citation …

Eminent Domain And Secondary Rent-Seeking, Gregory S. Alexander

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Policing L.A.'S Skid Row: Crime And Real Estate Redevelopment In Downtown Los Angeles [An Experiment In Real Time], Bernard E. Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

In this article, I document the present. I make a record, with photographs, interviews, maps, and observations of L.A.'s Skid Row as it is today. Drawing on the tradition and methods of critical socio-legal studies, I also explore the constitutive dimensions of deviance. I investigate the possible attraction that disorderliness and criminality may have to today's urban pioneers. I explore the idea that deviance and disorder may become, in some corners, a consumable good to urban dwellers. And I do this by drawing on numerous hours of personal observation on the streets of L.A.'s Skid Row, on interviews of service …

The Misplaced Flight To Substance, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

Courts and commentators have struggled for years to come up with a substantive test for what kinds of condemnations are for a "public use." Does public use mean government ownership and control of property after it is taken? This would preclude delegation of eminent domain to common carriers and utilities. Does public use mean public access to the property after it is taken? This would preclude using eminent domain to acquire facilities off-limits to the public, like prisons.

Faced with these problems of under-inclusion, courts have gravitated to the idea that public use means public purpose. The U.S. Supreme Court …

The Federalist Dimension Of Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence, Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

Conventional wisdom teaches that the Supreme Court's takings doctrine is a muddle. Appearances, however, are deceiving. The "property" protected by the Takings Clause is defined not by a single sovereign, but by the legislative enactments and judicial pronouncements of fifty separate states. As a result, federalism concerns - underappreciated in the takings literature - do and should play an important role in shaping the Court's takings doctrine. In particular, these concerns make it inappropriate for the Court to use the Takings Clause as a vehicle for articulating a comprehensive theory of the limits on government power to regulate land. This …

The Police Power Revisited: Phantom Incorporation And The Roots Of The Takings Muddle, Bradley C. Karkkainen

ExpressO

This article traces the roots of the current muddle in the Supreme Court’s regulatory takings jurisprudence to an ill-considered “phantom incorporation” holding in Penn Central v. New York (1978), the seminal case of the modern regulatory takings era. The Penn Central Court anachronistically misread a long line of Fourteenth Amendment Substantive Due Process cases as Fifth Amendment Takings Clause cases, misattributing to Chicago Burlington & Quincy v. Chicago (1897) (“Chicago B & Q”) the crucial holding that the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause applied to the states. Like other cases of its era, Chicago B & Q was decided strictly on …

Regulatory Takings And The Original Understanding Of The Takings Clause, Matthew P. Harrington

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

From The Lighthouses: How The First Federal Internal Improvement Projects Created Precedent That Broadened The Commerce Clause, Shrunk The Takings Clause, And Affected Early Nineteenth Century Constitutional Debate, Adam S. Grace

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Beyond Reparations: An American Indian Theory Of Justice, William C. Bradford

ExpressO

The number of states, corporations, and religious groups formally disowning past records of egregious human injustice is mushrooming. Although the Age of Apology is a global phenomenon, the question of reparations—a tort-based mode of redress whereby a wrongdoing group accepts legal responsibility and compensates victims for the damage it inflicted upon them—likely consumes more energy, emotion, and resources in the U.S. than in any other jurisdiction. Since the final year of the Cold War, the U.S. and its political subdivisions have apologized or paid compensation to Japanese-American internees, native Hawaiians, civilians killed in the Korean War, and African American victims …

All Party Oireachtas Committee On The Constitution Ninth Progress Report, Tom Dunne

Reports

Ireland, like many other countries with high rates of economic growth, is urbanising rapidly. There has been considerable emphasis on planning for this through the National Development Plan, the National Spatial Strategy, development guidelines and other measures. Through these the state intends that a proper planning process will lead growth rather than leaving it to market forces to drive development in what are regarded as undesirable directions. The latter it is feared will lead to unsuitable social, economic or physical outcomes. Unintended results have flowed from the implementation, or flawed implementation of many of these policies and have given rise …

Tahoe's Requiem: The Death Of The Scalian View Of Property And Justice, Laura S. Underkuffler

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Public Ruses, James E. Krier, Christopher Serkin

Articles

The public use requirement of eminent domain law may be working its way back into the United States Constitution. To be sure, the words "public use" appear in the document-and in many state constitutions as well, but the federal provision applies to the states in any event-as one of the Fifth Amendment's limitations on the government's inherent power to take private property against the will of its owners. (The other limitation is that "just compensation" must be paid, of which more later.) Any taking of private property, the text suggests, must be for public use. Those words, however, have amounted …

The Origins Of The American Public Trust Doctrine: What Really Happened In Illinois Central, Joseph D. Kearney, Thomas W. Merrill

Faculty Scholarship

The public trust doctrine has always been controversial. The general rule in American law favors ownership of natural resources as private property. The public trust doctrine, a jarring exception of uncertain dimensions, posits that some resources are subject to a perpetual trust that forecloses private exclusion rights. For environmentalists and preservationists who view private ownership as a source of the degradation of our natural and historical resources, the public trust doctrine holds out the hope of salvation through what amounts to a judicially enforced inalienability rule that locks resources into public ownership. For those who view private property as the …

The Inevitable Failure Of Nuisance-Based Theories Of The Takings Clause: A Reply To Professor Claeys, Stewart E. Sterk

Articles

Rejecting the proposition (advanced by Professor Eric Claeys) that the Rehnquist Court's conservatives have missed an opportunity to transform takings law, this commentary demonstrates that a nuisance-based theory cannot provide a comprehensive basis for takings clause jurisprudence. The commentary further establishes that no plausible vision of originalism supports a nuisance based theory, and concludes by arguing that judicial scrutiny of state and local land use practices is less deferential than it was at the inception of the Rehnquist Court.

Gao's Recent Report On The Implementation Of Exec. Order 12630 And The State Of Federal Agency Protections Of Private Property Rights: Hearing Before The H. Subcomm. On The Judiciary, 108th Cong., Oct. 16, 2003 (Statement Of John D. Echeverria, Exec. Dir., Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Inst., Geo. U. L. Center), John D. Echeverria

Testimony Before Congress

No abstract provided.

Takings Formalism And Regulatory Formulas: Exactions And The Consequences Of Clarity, Mark Fenster

ExpressO

A vocal minority of the U.S. Supreme Court recently announced its suspicion that lower courts and state and local administrative agencies are systematically ignoring constitutional rules intended to limit, through heightened judicial review, exactions as a land use regulatory tool. Exactions are the concessions local governments require of property owners as conditions for the issuance of the entitlements that enable the intensified use of real property. In two cases decided over the past two decades, Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994), the Court has established under the Takings Clause a logic and metrics …

Property As A Fundamental Constitutional Right? The German Example, Gregory S. Alexander

Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers

This article examines an apparent paradox in comparative constitutional law. Property rights are not treated as a fundamental right in American constitutional law; they are, however, under the Basic Law (i.e., constitution) of Germany, a social-welfare state that otherwise gives less weight to property. The article uses this apparent paradox as a vehicle for considering the different reasons why constitutions protect property. It explains the difference between the German and American constitutional treatment of property on the basis of the quite different approaches taken in the two systems to the purposes of constitutional protection of property.

Property As A Fundamental Constitutional Right? The German Example, Gregory S. Alexander

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Valuation Of An Experience: A Study In Land Use Regulation, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 779 (2003), Bob Madden

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Section 1983 Litigation: Supreme Court Review, Erwin Chemerinsky, Martin A. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Sacred Sites And Religious Freedom On Government Land, Richard B. Collins

Publications

No abstract provided.

U.S. Supreme Court Hands Two Big Wins To Municipal Governments In 2001-2002 Term, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Joint Teaching With A Colleague, For Just A Week Or Two, Richard H. Seamon, Stephen A. Spitz

Journal of Legal Education

No abstract provided.

Disestablishmentarianism Collides With The First Amendment: The Ghost Of Thomas Jefferson Still Haunts Churches, Mathew D. Staver, Anita L. Staver

Faculty Publications and Presentations

This history of church-state relations in the Commonwealth of Virginia date back to Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Efforts by Jefferson and others to disestablish the state church may be likened to an army conquering a foreign enemy. The state established church was viewed as a remnant of the British government. Disestablishment was considered to be part of the ongoing Revolution. As this article will show, the methods of disestablishment included prohibiting the incorporation of churches, confiscating property, and limiting the amount of real and personal property that churches may own.

Zoning Churches: Washington State Constitutional Limitations On The Application Of Land Use Regulations To Religious Buildings, Darren E. Carnell

Seattle University Law Review

This Article traces a path to various land use regulatory approaches that should survive scrutiny under the Washington State Constitution. Part I outlines the legal history of challenges to the application of zoning regulations to church buildings; Part I also describes the contexts in which such disputes presently arise. Part II introduces the Washington State Constitution's provision regarding the free exercise of religion and describes the limited body of case law that has applied this provision in the land use context. Part III considers the role of federal case law in interpreting the free exercise clause of the Washington State …

Religious Land Use Jurisprudence: The Negative Ramifications For Religious Activities In Washington After Open Door Baptist Church V. Clark County, Beth Prieve

Seattle University Law Review

Part II of this Note provides a history of religious land use jurisprudence in Washington. This part addresses growth management laws generally, and where these laws cross paths with constitutional guarantees of the free exercise of religion. Part III focuses on the Washington Supreme Court's Open Door decision, separately addressing both the majority opinion and the dissent. Part IV illustrates how the Washington Supreme Court misapplied Washington's religious freedom test in Open Door and significantly shifted religious land use jurisprudence. Part IV further discusses how this shift may include Washington's adoption of the lower federal standard and elaborates upon the …