Supreme Court Overturns Precedent In Property Rights Case. A Sign Of Things To Come?
A sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday that property owners can go directly to federal court with claims that state and local regulations effectively deprive landowners of the use of their property.
The 5-to-4 decision overturned decades of precedent that barred property owners from going to federal court until their claims had been denied in state court.
Federal courts are often viewed as friendlier than state courts for such property claims. The decision, with all five of the court's conservatives in the majority, may have particular effects in cities and coastal areas that have strict regulations for development.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 24 2019, @08:11AM (1 child)
FDR effectively grabbed a strip of property all along the border. If I recall correctly, it is 60 feet wide.
Technically, he didn't take away ownership. He just said that people couldn't build anything there, and that the federal government could use the land for a wall.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 24 2019, @08:40AM
Sounds rather reasonable, TBH. I wish you had a citation - let me see if I can find one . . .
This explains a lot - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Reservation [wikipedia.org] In Texas, the Roosevelt Reservation doesn't apply. That explains why cases like this one are making their way through the courts today - https://www.inversecondemnation.com/inversecondemnation/2008/03/eminent-domain.html [inversecondemnation.com]
The text of the proclamation available here - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Proclamation_758 [wikisource.org]
Note that California, Arizona, and New Mexico are all named specifically, but there is no mention of Texas.