March 2009

The Cato Institute has filed an amicus brief supporting the petitioner in Empress Casino Joliet Corp. v. Giannoulias, No. 08-945 (cert. petition filed Jan. 21, 2009). In that case, the Illinois Supreme Court held (896N.E.2d 277 (Ill. 2008) that a regulation which imposes a 3%”surcharge” on Illinois casinos with gross receipts over $200 millionper year, and then gives the money to horse racing tracks is not ataking of property. Several casinos challenged the law asserting,among other arguments, that the redistribution of their money to trackswas a taking.  The Illinois Supreme Court held that the regulation was a tax, and not subject to takingsanalysis. The cert petition asks:

In this case, the Illinois Supreme Court held that a state lawtransferring the revenues of four Illinois casinos to five Illinoishorse-racing tracks is categorically not susceptible to challenge underthe Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment because, in that court’sview, “regulatory actions

Continue Reading Is Robbing Peter To Pay Paul A Taking?

In Lichoulas v. City of Lowell, No. 08-1485, 08-2023 (1st Cir., Jan. 30, 2009), the U.S. Court of Appeals declined to rule on a property owner’s objection to a taking for redevelopment, holding that public use challenges belong in state court. Interestingly, the court cited Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 (1985) for the proposition that “any objection to the taking, or deficiency in adequate compensation, could be and preferably is to be done in state proceedings.” Slip op. at 6.

In 2006, the city took Lichoulas’ property, on which sat a hydroelectric power facility, inactive since 1994. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission earlier sent a notice to the owner that unless the facility began operating, it would consider the federal license abandoned. The property owner responded that he would forward a work plan to FERC, but it was never

Continue Reading First Circuit: Williamson County Applies To Eminent Domain Challenges