Our colleague William Wade, in addition to being an economist, is a prolific author on the topic we find fascinating, takings. He looks at the issues with an economists’ perspective, and we’ve found his articles very helpful. We’ve even posted a few over the years:
We’ve been remiss in updating for the past few days, caught up in the whirlwind that is the ABA Annual Meeting. But that’s now over and we can finally return to our usual blogging routine.
First up, News of the World:
We’re in Chicago this week participating in the ABA Annual Meeting. While we really are looking forward to a slate of thrilling committee meetings, what we’re really anticipating is the CLE programming. Here are what we think are the highlights:
If you need CLE credits, you are in luck. There’s a plethora of upcoming programs that may be of interest to readers.
First, the ones we’re involved with:
“Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
Chief Justice Earl Warren,
Brown v. Board of Education
“The Fourteenth Amendment does not enact
Mr. Herbert Spencer’s Social Statics.”
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes,
dissenting in Lochner v. New York
“…prejudice against discrete and insular minorities…”
Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, in footnote 4
Here’s the Complaint, filed late last week in an Oklahoma federal court, challenging the EPA and Corps of Engineers’ new “waters of the United States” rule under the Clean Water Act.
According to the lawsuit, the new WOTUS rules are an attempt to expand the regulatory authority of the agencies well beyond what the
Donald Trump is garnering a lot of press these days for things not related to eminent domain. And there’s a lot of awareness of the high-profile eminent domain battle in New Jersey, in which he was the “B” in an attempted “A to B” taking. But not everyone is as aware of a later, similar
The Land Use Institute, a program that for many years has been planned by co-chairs Frank Schnidman and Gideon Kanner, has found a new home with the American Bar Association’s Section of State and Local Government Law as the main sponsor. It also has a new Planning co-chair, Dean Patty Salkin of Touro Law
We were involved with this issue in the days leading up to the initiative election, and we represent an amicus party in this case, so we will post the court’s order without comment.
The title of this post tells you what you want to know.
Everyone is distracted today by the too-big-to-fail “Obamacare” ruling by the 6-3 Supreme Court (or, as Justice Scalia called it “SCOTUScare“), in which the Court concluded that the vibe of a statute matters more than its actual language, and the Court’s ruling in the “disparate impact” fair housing case (speaking of which