TITLE

AT LAST, SOME CLARITY: THE POTENTIAL LONG-TERM IMPACT OF LINGLE V. CHEVRON AND THE SEPARATION OF TAKINGS AND SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS

AUTHOR(S)
Barros, D. Benjamin
PUB. DATE
November 2005
SOURCE
Albany Law Review;2005, Vol. 69 Issue 1, p343
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Explores regulatory takings doctrine based on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Discussion on the test needed to prove violation of the Just Compensation Clause of the U.S. Constitution; Argument that cases that look like regulatory takings issues were in fact concerned with substantive due process issues; Impact of substantive due process cases Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. and Nectow v. City of Cambridge on takings law; Distinction between substantive due process and takings doctrine.
ACCESSION #
20374444

 

Related Articles

  • LINGLE V. CHEVRON USA, INC. Nelson, Sarah B. // Harvard Environmental Law Review;2006, Vol. 30 Issue 1, p281 

    Argues that the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in Lingle v. Chevron USA, Inc. can protect all kinds of environmental regulations from judicial overreaching. Writing for the majority, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor elucidated takings inquiries by separating two questions: first, whether the case...

  • Due Process Land Use Claims After Lingle. Byrne, J. Peter // Ecology Law Quarterly;2007, Vol. 34 Issue 2, p471 

    The Supreme Court held in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. that challenges to the validity of land use regulations for failing to advance governmental interests must be brought under the Due Process Clause, rather than the Takings clause, and must be evaluated under a deferential standard. This...

  • THE PROBLEM OF EQUALITY IN TAKINGS. Davidson, Nestor M. // Northwestern University Law Review;Winter2008, Vol. 102 Issue 1, p1 

    The article considers the emerging equality dimensions both under the Takings Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The author argue that the use of the Takings Clause as framework to subject regulations to review under the Lochner ruling has long posed an anomaly in...

  • Indigestion from Eating Crow1: The Impact of Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. on the Future of Regulatory Takings Doctrine. Jacobs, Daniel A. // Urban Lawyer;Summer2006, Vol. 38 Issue 3, p451 

    The article focuses on the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court case Lingle v. Chevron on the future of regulatory takings doctrine. The majority opinion in the case makes a mea culpa and declares the Supreme Court's or the Justice's own previous application of constitutional law within a case or...

  • ENDS AND MEANS IN TAKINGS LAW AFTER LINGLE V. CHEVRON. Romero, Alan // Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law;Spring2008, Vol. 23 Issue 2, p333 

    The article focuses on the decision of the Supreme Court in the Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. case. The author stated that the Court's decision that the substantial advancement tests must not be applied as a freestanding takings test is right, however its rejection of an independent taking test...

  • DOES THE COMPENSATION CLAUSE BURDEN THE GOVERNMENT OR BENEFIT THE OWNER? THE COMPENSATION CLAUSE AS PROCESS. Galperin, Joshua Ulan // University of Baltimore Journal of Land & Development;Fall2011, Vol. 1 Issue 1, p27 

    The article discusses the Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment as a procedural requirement that is not to burden the government or benefit property owner. It offers information on critical authorities for regulatory takings and analyzes the Compensation Clause in light of the regulatory...

  • Property Tests, Due Process Tests and Regulatory Takings Jurisprudence. Eagle, Steven J. // Brigham Young University Law Review;2007, Vol. 2007 Issue 4, p899 

    The United States Supreme Court recently clarified in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. that its often-expressed "substantially advance" formulation sounds in due process, and thus should be rejected as an appropriate takings test. The Court also explained that due process provides an independent...

  • Recent Developments in Land Use, Planning and Zoning Law Exactions Update: The State of Development Exactions After Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. Curtin, Daniel J.; Curtin Jr., Daniel J.; Gowder Jr., W. Andrew; Wenter, Bryan W. // Urban Lawyer;Summer2006, Vol. 38 Issue 3, p641 

    The article discusses legislative exactions in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court takings case Lingle v. Chevron. The Lingle case decision overturned a 25-year-old takings precedent and, in doing so, clarified the landscape of takings law, the development of which had been criticized by legal...

  • Just a Flesh Wound? The Impact of Lingle v. Chevron on Regulatory Takings Law. Radford, R. S. // Urban Lawyer;Summer2006, Vol. 38 Issue 3, p437 

    The article focuses on the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court case Lingle v. Chevron on the country's regulatory takings law. The decision on the case repudiated a test of the constitutionality of land use regulations under the Takings Clause. The origin and importance of the substantial...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics