State and federal government regulations are disciplined by property-owner coalitions whose "voice" is clearly audible in the statehouses and in Congress.

Offers policy recommendations from Cato Institute experts on every major policy issue. Providing both in-depth analysis and concrete recommendations, the Handbook is an invaluable resource for policymakers and anyone else interested in securing liberty through limited government.

Controversies over public regulation of private land have dominated political agendas in recent years, especially at the local level. Land use and environmental regulation have reached unprecedented levels, and federal and state courts have garnered recent headlines by striking down regulations. Rights and regulations are on a collision course, and how they are reconciled will have a major impact on individuals, governments, and communities in the decades ahead. This book is the first systematic attempt to assess key constitutional developments in the land use field during the last decade in state and federal supreme courts. It highlights important trends, including the growing role of state supreme courts, attacks on regulation as exclusionary, and the emergence of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment as a potentially major limitation on governmental power.

This law school study aid contains the history and cases related to the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution. The authors bring their long-time teaching experience to this important area.

If legal scholar Richard Epstein is right, then the New Deal is wrong, if not unconstitutional. Epstein reaches this sweeping conclusion after making a detailed analysis of the eminent domain, or takings, clause of the Constitution, which states that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. In contrast to the other guarantees in the Bill of Rights, the eminent domain clause has been interpreted narrowly. It has been invoked to force the government to compensate a citizen when his land is taken to build a post office, but not when its value is diminished by a comprehensive zoning ordinance. Epstein argues that this narrow interpretation is inconsistent with the language of the takings clause and the political theory that animates it. He develops a coherent normative theory that permits us to distinguish between permissible takings for public use and impermissible ones. He then examines a wide range of government regulations and taxes under a single comprehensive theory. He asks four questions: What constitutes a taking of private property? When is that taking justified without compensation under the police power? When is a taking for public use? And when is a taking compensated, in cash or in kind? Zoning, rent control, progressive and special taxes, workers’ compensation, and bankruptcy are only a few of the programs analyzed within this framework. Epstein’s theory casts doubt upon the established view today that the redistribution of wealth is a proper function of government. Throughout the book he uses recent developments in law and economics and the theory of collective choice to find in the eminent domain clause a theory of political obligation that he claims is superior to any of its modern rivals.