Not a takings case, but we’re posting it here because there’s an eminent domain angle. In Nilsen v. University of Washington, No. 24-7460 (9th Cir. Aug. 13, 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed whether UW is an arm of the State of Washington and consequently outside section 1983’s definition of a “person.” The court answered yes.
Continue Reading CA9: When Deciding Whether A Public University Is A Section 1983 “Person,” Eminent Domain Power Is A Big Clue
The focus in the Kelo majority on Euclidean-style planning — if a taking where a private party either ends up with the land or is benefited is part of some kind of plan, then it is likely ok — raises the question: how much planning must the condemning agency do before it can take property?
The Michigan Court of Appeals took up that question in County of Kalamazoo v. Berry, No. 367503 (Sep. 11, 2026) (per curiam), and concluded that identifying a valid public use and explaining why the property is needed is about all the “plan” needs to be.
Continue Reading County Can Condemn Private “Inholding” Surrounded By Parkland, Even If The “Plan” Is Simply To Make The Park Whole
We’ve done fleecy vests, trucker hats, and jackets. We’ve even done a mug before.
The latest, in prototype form.
Continue Reading Latest Swag (Prototype)
“This was not written for chiefs!” On the day we celebrate Constitution Day (or should we say Khaaaaan-stitution Day?) we have to admit that pretty much nothing beats One Named Kirk’s reading of the Preamble.
Continue Reading The Real Prime Directive: Happy Constitution Day 2026
Every year at this time, it seems, we realize once again that as you get older, you overlook birthdays. Time speeds up, or maybe slows down. Very Proustian. Easy to forget, and maybe something you don’t really want to remember. Thus, it occurred to us only yesterday that that this blog’s “birthday” was looming and we almost let it slip by without notice.
Continue Reading They Say It’s Your Birthday (It’s Our Birthday Too Yeah): Entering Our Twentieth Year
The bottom line in Hernandez-Castrodad v. Steidel-Figueroa, No. 23-1872 (July 1, 2026), is that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ takings claims, although it had at least partially different reasons than the district court.
First, let’s get to the district court’s reasoning. The takings claim
July 4, 2026 is the 250th birthday of the United States. Those of us who were around 50 years ago for the bicentennial remember that a very big deal was made of the United States of America’s 200th birthday. The 250th doesn’t seem to be treated as anywhere near such a big deal by the public. Different times; and indeed a very different America. Too bad, because we think it is an opportunity lost. So we’re posting our usual July 4 missive.
Continue Reading The Verified Complaint In Equity: The Declaration Of Independence, v.250
Our annual reminder that today* (in our case 811 years ago), on a grassy plain down by the river, the barons convinced bad King John to affix his seal to Magna Carta.
Or the Magna Carta. Or Magna Charta. However you want to grammarize it. (And no, he didn’t “sign” it, they didn’t
A bit of self-promotion this Friday. Our shop put out a short video (above) and print ad (below) to capture the vibe of why owners may object when their property is threatened by eminent domain, especially when that property is their home.
Takings and property rights mavens: how many times have you heard a
Yes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in Banks v. Charter Twp. of Bloomfield, No. 25-1833 (Apr. 28, 2026) is unpublished, and we usually don’t cover unpublished opinions. But we put aside our usual reluctance to discuss unpublished work because the decision raises an important point: are the rules in “regulatory” takings only applicable when the government has adopted a regulation?
Continue Reading CA6: To Be A Regulatory Taking, There Must Be A Regulation