Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2298307
 


 



Fees, Expenditures, and the Takings Clause


Justin R. Pidot


University of Denver Sturm College of Law

2014


Abstract:     
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District extended heightened constitutional scrutiny to monetary exactions. But the Court did not define that term, and, arguably, it could encompass two distinct forms of conditions placed on government issued-permits: First, those that require a permit applicant to pay money to the government (which this essay refers to as a fee), and second those that require a permit applicant to engage in activities that cost money, but do not transfer money to the government (which this essay refers to as an expenditure). Based on the theoretical underpinnings of takings doctrine, and the language of the Koontz decision itself, this essay argues that heightened scrutiny should extend only to fees, and not to expenditures.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 39

Keywords: Regulatory takings, exactions, unconstitutional conditions, Fifth Amendment, Takings Clause, Koontz

working papers series





Download This Paper

Date posted: July 26, 2013 ; Last revised: September 1, 2014

Suggested Citation

Pidot, Justin R., Fees, Expenditures, and the Takings Clause (2014). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2298307 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2298307

Contact Information

Justin R. Pidot (Contact Author)
University of Denver Sturm College of Law ( email )
2255 E. Evans Avenue
Denver, CO 80208
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 360
Downloads: 83
Download Rank: 183,731

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.313 seconds