Property rights

You probably already know our Toronto friend and colleague Shane Rayman. He’s the lawyer responsible for the fascinating Supreme Court (Canada, naturally) decision in Antrim Truck Centre, wherein the Court recognized that under the Expropriation Act, Ontario had an obligation to compensate a property owner for “injurious affection” even though the highway project

Check this out, the latest episode of Clint Schumacher’s Eminent Domain Podcast, where his guest is Judge Andrew Edison (who may be familiar to many of you for his ALI-CLE presentation a couple of years ago about the eminent domain angle in the JFK assassination film).

Today, the topic is Robert Moses, NYC

Screenshot 2021-12-12 at 09-10-29 Event Registration

This Wednesday, December 15, 2021, at 1pm ET (10am PT) our PLF colleague Chris Kieser will be presenting an American Bar Association webinar, produced by the Real Property, Probate, and Trust Section, “Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid: Supreme Court Weighs in on Definition of ‘Private Property’ and Implications for the Future.”

Register here

If you knew nothing about a case except that it was public use challenge to a redevelopment condemnation in New York, you’d be on firm footing if you guessed the outcome was not going to be favorable to the property owner. New York, after all, is what one colleague called the worst in the nation

PASH symposium

Back in February, we were honored to be part of the University of Hawaii Law Review’s symposium “25 Years of PASH,” a retrospective of one of the Hawaii Supreme Court’s most famous (or infamous) decisions, Pub. Access Shoreline Haw. v. Haw. Cnty. Plan. Comm’n, 79 Haw. 425, 903 P.2d 1246 (1993), cert. denied

Check it out: the “Digging a Hole” Podcast includes in one of its recent episodes a discussion of SCOTUS’s latest takings case, Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid.

Our final guest for Season 3 is Nikolas Bowie, assistant professor of law at Harvard Law School and board member of the ACLU of Massachusetts, Lawyers for

Screenshot 2021-11-15 at 11-33-55 Takings Localism

Be sure to check out the latest article from takings scholars and Nestor Davidson and Tim Mulvaney, “Takings Localism,” 121 Colum. L. Rev. 215 (2021) (pdf here).

Here’s the abstract:

Conflicts over “sanctuary” cities, minimum wage laws, and gender-neutral bathrooms have brought the problematic landscape of contemporary state preemption of local governance to national attention. This Article contends that more covert, although equally robust, state interference can be found in property, with significant consequences for our understanding of takings law.

Takings jurisprudence looks to the states to mediate most tensions between individual property rights and community needs, as the takings federalism literature recognizes. Takings challenges, however, often involve local governments. If the doctrine privileges the democratic process to resolve most takings claims, then, that critical process is a largely local one.

Despite the centrality of local democracy to takings, state legislatures have restricted local authority on property issues in a range of ways. States have expanded compensatory liability for owners facing local regulations, imposed procedural constraints on local authority, and limited the exercise of foundational local powers. Seen in its entirety, this state intervention—like contemporary “new preemption”—is acontextual and unduly rigid, cutting at the heart of the devolutionary principles underlying takings jurisprudence.

This unbalanced state role requires a recalibration of decisionmaking power between state and local government to foster intersystemic dialogue and reflection. States certainly play a crucial role in defining and protecting property interests, but they must justify choices to constrain local discretion when state and local values conflict. The extant state statutory regime dispenses with this justificatory task via a formalistic disregard for the contextualization that legitimates vertical allocations of authority. A corrective to decades of imbalance in state ordering of local authority would thus properly recognize “takings localism.”

Free up local governments, or tie their hands…which is better? After reading this, you decide.
Continue Reading New Article: “Takings Localism” (Tim Mulvaney & Nestor Davidson)

“This year, the Northwestern University Law Review presents a symposium on property and inequality, which brings together scholars of legal history, property, tax, land use, fair housing, environmental law, natural resources and water rights, family law, education, and constitutional law, to highlight new scholarship at the intersection of these fields.”

More information, as well as

FCetK11XoAASxO2

Please plan on joining us next Wednesday, November 3, 2021, at 8pm ET for the next gathering of the Eminent Domain and Right of Way Club, a social media gathering spot “geared toward right of way professionals as well as anyone interested in the acquisition of land rights for infrastructure projects.” Register for the