September 2022

PXL_20220927_164202969

We spoke on the second panel of the day at the 2022 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference at the William and Mary Law School. The subject of our panel — which included Professors David Callies, Tim Mulvaney, and Dave Owen — was “Reshaping the Framework Protecting Property Under the Roberts Court.“

Here’s a rough transcript of my remarks.

————————————–

President Reveley, Professor Butler, distinguished Brigham-Kanner Prizewinners (present and future), mentors, colleagues, family and friends: thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

The story goes that when asked what it was like to be a part of the “Rat Pack,*” that Dean Martin responded “It’s Frank’s world, we just live in it.”

Fd5_62PUoAEo-y8

When I first heard the title of this portion of the program and the discussion of how and if the Roberts Court is reshaping property, my first reaction was a paraphrase of Dean…

Continue Reading Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference 2022 Report: It’s Chief Justice Roberts’ Property World, We Just Live In It

The facts of the Connecticut Appellate Court’s opinion in Schaghticoke Tribal Nation v. Connecticut, No. AC 43811 (Sep. 27, 2022), really stand out.

Back in the day — and we mean waaaaay back in the day — as in 1801! — the State of Connecticut sold some land which in 1752 (!) the Colony of Connecticut had allowed members of the Schaghticoke tribe to use,.

Flash forward to present day when the Nation sued, alleging the 1801 sale was a breach of the State’s trust duties, and a taking of the Nation’s private property. The short story is that the trial court dismissed and the appellate court affirmed. But the real interesting story is the longer one, and we hope you find the time to read the opinion’s factual recitation.

That longer story starts in 1736 when the tribe settled in an area along the Housatonic River. In response…

Continue Reading Connecticut’s 1801 Sale Of Tribal Land Was Not A Taking

We were all set to write a deep and insightful takings analysis of the U.S. Court of Appeals’ recent opinion in Net Choice, LLC v. Paxton, No. 21-51178 (Sep. 16, 2022), a challenge by the major social media platforms to a Texas statute that limits the platforms’ ability to censor speech or “de-platform” (kick out) speakers they don’t like.

In NetChoice, the Fifth Circuit sustained the statute against a Free Speech challenge. There’s been a lot of commentary on the court’s reasoning, as well as the conflicting result reached by the Eleventh Circuit in a similar case. See here and here, for example.

But the arguments in both of those cases focused on the First Amendment speech issues. Naturally, we don’t limit our view of the issues, and see lurking property rights questions. But in the Fifth Circuit case, the plaintiffs purposely avoided raising takings claims:…

Continue Reading Viewing Social Media Content Censorship Through The Takings Lens

PXL_20220921_210440256
Introduced on George Wythe’s steps.

One of the (many) great things about teaching and studying law at the William and Mary Law School is the location. A short walk from historic Williamsburg, the Law School (the nation’s first law school, by the way) is at the center of where some very important property events took place.

So it was last evening. The W&M Legal History Society asked Thomas Jefferson, Esq., an up-and-coming local Williamsburg lawyer to speak to a group of law students and lawprofs, offering his thoughts about the profession. He even was eager to respond to some very difficult questions about his life, his philosophy and politics, and his personal conduct.

Meeting on the front steps of Jefferson’s mentor George Wythe’s home, we got to know a bit more about Mr. Jefferson’s W&M training, his legal apprenticeship under Mr. Wythe, and some of the lawsuits in…

Continue Reading The Pursuit Of Happiness, Or Property? Asking T. Jeff The Tough Questions

  Screenshot 2022-09-20 at 10-17-17 Amazon.com I'm with stupid

Coulda been worse.

When the Third Circuit’s published opinion in Yaw v. Delaware River Basin Comm’n, No. 21-2316 (Sep. 16, 2022) popped up in our feed we got a slight frisson in anticipation – a claim that the Commission’s banning of fracking was a taking.Thank you Knick for opening the federal courts back up to takings claims!

But alas, no decision on the merits. After all, one of the downsides of federal court is the higher justiciability barriers that must be overcome before the court deals with the merits of a takings claim. And so it is in this opinion:

Plaintiffs-Appellants—two Pennsylvania state senators, the Pennsylvania Senate Republican Caucus, and several Pennsylvania municipalities—filed this lawsuit challenging the ban. Among other things, they allege that, in enacting the ban, the Commission exceeded its authority under the Delaware River Basin Compact, violated the Takings Clause of the United…

Continue Reading I Made A Takings Claim And All I Got Was This Lousy Opinion On Article III Standing

Clint Schumacher’s Eminent Domain podcast is one of those things that we almost shouldn’t post about. After all, every episode is worth your time. But this one is especially good. After all, it features our law firm colleague and friend Jon Houghton, discussing what you all know is one of our fave topics, regulatory takings.

As Clint describes it:

Jon Houghton of Pacific Legal Foundation joins the podcast today to talk about regulatory takings. This is a complex area of the law, but Jon is a true expert and breaks it down into understandable pieces. He discusses how practitioners can assess when a regulation has risen to the level of a taking. He also discusses regulatory taking issues and cases that are current.

So even though we always say “check out the Eminent Domain Podcast,” we’re saying it again. Check it out.Continue Reading Jon Houghton On Regulatory Takings – Eminent Domain Podcast

On the day we celebrate Constitution Day (or should we say Khaaaaan-stitution Day?) we have to admit that pretty much nothing beats One Named Kirk’s reading of the Preamble. 

KIRK: This was not written for chiefs.Hear me! Hear this! Among my people, we carry many such words as this from many lands, many worlds. Many are equally good and are as well respected, but wherever we have gone, no words have said this thing of importance in quite this way. Look at these three words written larger than the rest, with a special pride never written before or since. Tall words proudly saying We the People. That which you call “Ee’d Plebnista” was not written for the chiefs or the kings or the warriors or the rich and powerful, but for all the people! Down the centuries, you have slurred the meaning of the words: “We…

Continue Reading Hear Me! Hear This! This Was Not Written For Chiefs! – Happy Constitution Day 2022

Screenshot 2022-09-13 at 14-12-11 Feed LinkedIn

One last reminder that there’ still time to register for the upcoming Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference at the William and Mary Law School in Williamsburg, Virginia, September 29-30, 2022. If you can’t make it to the historic campus, there’s an option to attend remotely.

In our opinion, the Conference is the best of its kind because it brings together legal scholars and the practicing bar to talk dirt law theory and practice. We also a have a full supplemental program for law students, that covers property law and careers in eminent domain law, a recruiting session, a program on international property rights, and a program on land use law.

Registration for the Conference is ongoing, and you can sign up here.

Here is the full agenda. (We’ll be speaking on Panel #2, “Reshaping the Framework Protecting Property Under the Roberts Court.”)

Come on, join us!

Continue Reading Still Time To Join Us (In-Person Or Remote) For The 19th Annual Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference

A short one (unpublished) from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, considering an issue we’ve been following: what is the effect of the government’s claim that it is regulating property for what looks like a valid “police power” purpose?

As noted, that’s a road we’ve been down before. Here’s a sampling:

In Bojicic v. Dewine, No. 21-4123 (Aug. 22, 2022), the Sixth Circuit was considering a takings and due process challenge to the governor’s Co-19 shutdown orders. The court rejected the district court’s rationale…

Continue Reading CA6: No “Police Power” Exception To Takings (But It’s Nonetheless Dispositive As Penn Central’s Character)