Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

The original understanding of the Takings Clause and the political process

Article Abstract:

The Takings Clause should be interpreted using a process-based approach, which would grant compensation only for cases in which the political process is likely to fail to protect property interests, such as cases involving environmental racism or singling out. The proposed interpretation is supported by both originalist and non-originalist grounds. The Takings Clause was originally intended to cover only physical takings because those were most likely to be affected by process failure. However, interpretation of the Takings Clause began to go astray in 1922 with the Supreme Court decision in Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon.

Author: Treanor, William Michael
Publisher: Columbia Law Review
Publication Name: Columbia Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-1958
Year: 1995
Cases

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


The curious resurrection of custom: beach access and judicial takings

Article Abstract:

The customary law tradition may have a place in debates over land use, public rights and property rights, but customary law should only be employed as it was traditionally intended. Under customary law, long-standing customs can evolve to have the effect of law. Some jurisdictions are enforcing customary laws on a state-wide basis, even though customs are typically more localized. States are using the customary nature of laws in takings suits to claim that the newly recognized laws have always existed, suggesting that judicial recognition of custom did not result in a property right loss.

Author: Bederman, David J.
Publisher: Columbia Law Review
Publication Name: Columbia Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-1958
Year: 1996
Beaches, Public easements, Customary law

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


The concept of property and the Takings Clause

Article Abstract:

The 20th century conception of property as rights has caused a failure in doctrine relating to the Takings Clause which is malformed in the attempt to fit the conception to the constitutional language. A new conception based upon a broader post-19th century conception of property as things should be developed to replace the faulty interpretation which exists. Divided ownership, intangibles, and government power should be taken into account.

Author: Wenar, Leif
Publisher: Columbia Law Review
Publication Name: Columbia Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-1958
Year: 1997
Constitutional law, Constitutional interpretation, Right of property, Property rights

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Eminent domain (Law), Regulatory taking (Law), Interpretation and construction, Laws, regulations and rules
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The general duty clause of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. Recent developments in OSHA litigation
  • Abstracts: The right to education under the South African Constitution. Judicial redistricting and the Article 1 state legislature
  • Abstracts: The content and focus of the codes of ethics of the world's largest transnational corporations. Multinational corporations and the competition for media influence in developing countries
  • Abstracts: What price resignation? Leaving the ABA over abortion is not morally necessary. Differences of opinion
  • Abstracts: The impact of trade practices law on disputes involving a sports league and its member clubs. Editorial
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.