|
||||
|
||||
Deterrence and Distribution in the Law of TakingsMichael A. HellerColumbia University - Columbia Law School James E. KrierUniversity of Michigan Law School Harvard Law Review, Vol. 112, No. 5, March 1999 Abstract: Supreme Court decisions over the last three-quarters of a century have turned the words of the Takings Clause into a secret code that only a momentary majority of the Court is able to understand. The Justices faithfully moor their opinions to the particular terms of the Fifth Amendment, but only by stretching the text beyond recognition. A better approach is to consider the purposes of the Takings Clause, efficiency and justice, and go anew from there. Such a method reveals that in some cases there are good reasons to require payment by the government when it regulates property, but not to insist upon compensation to each aggrieved property owner. In other cases, the opposite is true -- compensation to individuals makes sense, but payment by the responsible government agency does not. Uncoupling efficiency and justice would invigorate the law of takings.
JEL Classification: K11 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: June 16, 1999Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.500 seconds