Law of Property Rights Protection: Limitations on Governmental Powers, Second Edition is a comprehensive, up-to-date review of the on-going battle between government's desire to regulate and limit private property use, and property owners' equally powerful desire to avoid economically damaging or unreasonable or unconstitutional limitations. Federal, state, and local governments often wish to restrict or condition uses of private property, while private property owners wish to avoid or seek compensation for such regulatory controls. This battle between property and regulation is one of the most emotionally charged and fiercely contested issues in contemporary law. An enormous amount of litigation, at both the federal and state level, has stemmed from questions surrounding the extent to which government may restrict or even prevent certain private property uses. The relevant law is constantly changing and evolving, so count on the Law of Property Right Protection to bring you completely up to date. The book is organized according to the many ways that government powers over private property are limited, by the federal and state constitutions, the common law, and equitable principles and has been cited by the United States Supreme Court, federal courts, and state appellate courts. Law of Property Rights Protection: Limitations on Governmental Powers, Second Edition: Analyzes relevant and current case law, and identifies (1) which challenges by private property owners were successful, (2) what facts seemed compelling to reviewing courts considering property-restrictive regulations, and (3) what arguments by property owners tend to fail in the eyes of reviewing courts. Offers advice on which property-protective provisions in constitutional law maximize the likelihood of a successful challenge to restrictive regulations, as well as advice on how to mount a legal challenge which will not be dismissed on jurisdictional or procedural grounds. Considers all of the primary limitations on government regulations of property - Takings; Due Process; Contracts Clause; Equal Protection; the Vested Rights Doctrine; Anti-Retroactivity Presumptions; Internal Limits on the Police Power Includes the full range of property interests - such as real property; contract rights; leasehold rights; unpatented mining claims; water rights; intellectual property; rights of access and entry; royalty rights; all forms of intangible property interests Using Laitos' strategic approach, and easy-to-follow organization, this book will help you formulate arguments and challenges which may overcome or invalidate onerous regulations on the use and enjoyment of private property. Previous Edition Law of Property Rights Protection: Limitations on Governmental Powers, ISBN 9780735501522

In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the city of New London, Connecticut, could condemn fifteen residential properties in order to transfer them to a new private owner. Although the Fifth Amendment only permits the taking of private property for “public use,” the Court ruled that the transfer of condemned land to private parties for “economic development” is permitted by the Constitution—even if the government cannot prove that the expected development will ever actually happen. The Court’s decision in Kelo v. City of New London empowered the grasping hand of the state at the expense of the invisible hand of the market. In this detailed study of one of the most controversial Supreme Court cases in modern times, Ilya Somin argues that Kelo was a grave error. Economic development and “blight” condemnations are unconstitutional under both originalist and most “living constitution” theories of legal interpretation. They also victimize the poor and the politically weak for the benefit of powerful interest groups and often destroy more economic value than they create. Kelo itself exemplifies these patterns. The residents targeted for condemnation lacked the influence needed to combat the formidable government and corporate interests arrayed against them. Moreover, the city’s poorly conceived development plan ultimately failed: the condemned land lies empty to this day, occupied only by feral cats. The Supreme Court’s unpopular ruling triggered an unprecedented political reaction, with forty-five states passing new laws intended to limit the use of eminent domain. But many of the new laws impose few or no genuine constraints on takings. The Kelo backlash led to significant progress, but not nearly as much as it may have seemed. Despite its outcome, the closely divided 5-4 ruling shattered what many believed to be a consensus that virtually any condemnation qualifies as a public use under the Fifth Amendment. It also showed that there is widespread public opposition to eminent domain abuse. With controversy over takings sure to continue, The Grasping Hand offers the first book-length analysis of Kelo by a legal scholar, alongside a broader history of the dispute over public use and eminent domain and an evaluation of options for reform.