Water is aprecious resource said to be held in the “public trust.” The Hawaii Constitution provides that “theState has an obligation to protect, control and regulate the use of Hawaii’swater resources for the benefit of its people.” To this end, the State evaluates andregulates the use of these resources through its Commission of Water ResourceManagement.
Mark Your Calendars: 10th Hawaii Land Use Law Conference (Jan. 17-18, 2013)
Planning co-chairs Professor David Callies and Ben Kudo have once again assembled a stellar faculty and put together an agenda that covers
Supreme Court Again Focused On Property Cases?
Check out “Property rights take center stage in disputes over wetlands, flooding,” by Greenwire‘s Lawrence Hurley, asking whether the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent “flurry of activity” in property cases augurs a renewed interest in these issues by the Court, or is, as lawprof John Echeverria is quoted as suggesting, “serendipity.”
So far
Justice Stevens, Recused In The “Stop The Beach Renourishment” Case, Weighs In On The “Stop The Beach Renourishment” Case
You can take the Justice out of the Court, but you apparently can’t take the Court out of the Justice. Retired Justice John Paul Stevens has added the “ninth vote” (his words, not ours) in Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Dep’t of Environmental Protection, No. 08-11 (June 17, 2010), the case is
Oral Argument Recording In SCOTUS Flood Takings Case
The Oyez Project has posted the recording in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012), the takings case argued earlier this week in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Check it out here. We posted our summary of the petitioner’s arguments here, and will be posting
Does The NY Times Know That Most Floodwaters Eventually Recede (Or Might?)
The New York Times editorial page has weighed in on Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012), the takings case argued earlier this week in the U.S. Supreme Court.
And, no surprise, in When Flooding Is Not a Taking, the great beneficiary of eminent domain
Of Picnics And Floods: Oral Arguments In SCOTUS Takings Case, Part I
Here’s the transcript of Wednesday’s argument in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012).
BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front): we’re predicting the property owner win with a minimum six-Justice majority (perhaps more), with a narrowly drawn opinion vacating the Federal Circuit’s conclusion that temporary
SG Doubles Down: Transcript Of Arguments In SCOTUS Flood Takings Case, Part II
Here’s the transcript of Wednesday’s argument in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012).
BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front): we’re predicting the property owner win with a minimum six-Justice majority (perhaps more), with a narrowly drawn opinion vacating the Federal Circuit’s conclusion that temporary
SCOTUS Arguments In Flood Takings Case
Later today the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012), to review the Federal Circuit’s conclusion that flooding caused by the Corps of Engineers was only temporary, and even thought it destroyed trees owned by Arkansas, it was not
Shifting Gears In SCOTUS Takings Case: Are Floods Treated As Physical Invasions, Or Analyzed Under Penn Central?
If you understand that headline, congratulations: you are officially a takings geek.
Here’s another piece worth reading, to prepare yourself for next week’s oral arguments in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012): Is the federal government shifting the focus in Arkansas Game & Fish Commission?