Note: please join us today, Tuesday, June, 23, 2020 (12 noon Hawaii Time) for a (free!) webinar. We’ll analyze the latest on “Lockdowns, testing and tracking: Are they all really legal?”
+++++++++++++++++++
There have been quite a few lawsuits filed nationwide challenging the various shut-down and “essential”/”nonessential” distinctions being made. So many
A long opinion, but a short post. In Stanford Vina Ranch Irrigation Co. v. California, No. C085762 (June 18, 2020), the California Court of Appeal held that water rights are not really property rights.
That’s a bit of an overstatement, of course. But not a huge one.
In an inverse condemnation case, the court
A new, must-add-to-your-reading-list article from takings and expropriations law scholar Professor Shai Stern.
In “Pandemic Takings: Compensating for Public Health Emergency Regulation,” Professor Stern dives into a question a lot of us have been pondering lately, namely whether the pandemic-related shutdown orders might trigger the Just Compensation imperative in the Fifth Amendment’s
Please join us tomorrow, Tuesday, June, 23, 2020 (12 noon Hawaii Time) for a (free!) webinar. We’ll analyze the latest on “Lockdowns, testing and tracking: Are they all really legal?”
We’ll be joining constitutional lawyer Jeff Portnoy and Dr. Keli’i Akina for the program, sponsored by the Grassroot Institute of Hawaii. Sign up
The University of Hawaii Law Review has graciously agreed to publish an article we’ve been working on, “Hoist the Yellow Flag and Spam® Up: The Separation of Powers Limitation on Hawaii’s Emergency Authority,” 43 U. Haw. L. Rev. ___ (forthcoming 2020) (download from SSRN at the link).
The article takes a deeper dive
Here’s the recording of last week’s program we did for the King Kamehameha V Judiciary History Center, “Constitutional Law and States of Emergency: Lessons from Hawaii’s Judicial History for the COVID-19 Pandemic.”
Links to the cases and other materials we referred to in the presentation are posted here.
Tomorrow, we’ll be joining
It’s been a long week, and it’s Friday with a filing coming up. So we’re not going to spend a lot of time digesting the Federal Circuit’s opinion in Alford v. United States, No 19-1678 (June 19, 2020). Plus, it is a short one (11 pages) that makes one major point.
Short story: after
Here are the links and other materials which we spoke about in this afternoon’s program for the King Kamehameha V Judiciary History Center, “Constitutional Law and States of Emergency: Lessons from Hawaii’s Judicial History for the COVID-19 Pandemic.”
Supreme Court of the Kingdom of Hawai‘i
M. GIBSON, PRESIDENT BOARD OF HEALTH,
v.
THE STEAMER MADRAS.
JANUARY TERM, 1884.
February 26, 1884.
APPEAL FROM DECISION OF JUDD, C. J., IN ADMIRALTY.
JUDD, C. J., MCCULLY and AUSTIN, JJ.
OPINION OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE.
The decision of the Chief Justice, appealed from, was as
Just published: the 2020 Zoning and Planning Law Handbook (Green Book). The first section of the Summary of Contents is about Takings, and includes as the lead piece Professor Gideon Kanner and Michael Berger’s tour-de-force article, “The Nasty, Brutish, and Short Life of Agins v. City of Tiburon.” It also includes
