Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W46286497> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 60 of
60
with 100 items per page.
- W46286497 abstract "The American legal community remains perplexed and fascinated by the question of which exercises of governmental power should fall prey to the constitutional ban on uncompensated takings of property. Intense interest stems partly from the Supreme Court's professed inability to provide a general solution to the takings problem and partly from the undeniable appeal of contrasting points of view. Students of the takings controversy, however, are perhaps most intrigued by the extent to which it raises fundamental questions of political life. Which resources should be treated as crucial to personal well-being and thus either exempt from any collective redistribution or at least shielded against uncompensated loss? Will a strict compensation requirement encourage shy or self-reliant people to trust communal bonds, or will it prevent the collective control necessary to sound resource management? Are satisfactory general formulations available to decision-makers responsible for identifying those items of value which the government may purchase but not destroy?This Article is an effort to extend analysis of the takings question beyond criticism of any particular case or even of a particular perspective. Its principal goal is to examine the intellectual structure of the takings problem critically in order to question the current framework of scholarly debate.Part I describes the hidden structure of the takings controversy. More specifically, Part I describes how private law's purported function of allocating resource claims and public law's professed role of protecting already allocated resources threaten to become indistinguishable; thereby imperiling coherent judicial enforcement of the just compensation clause.Part II applies the intellectual framework developed in the first part to the doctrines and rationales the Court has employed in takings cases. In particular, the Court's three-factor test for evaluating takings claims is criticized for its reliance on general solutions to the underlying problems of property law that have failed to provide a coherent framework for takings jurisprudence.Part III attempts to demonstrate how Part I's framework also illuminates the confusion in scholarly approaches to the takings problem. Part III emphasizes the extent to which general solutions have failed to resolve the dilemmas posed by the fifth amendment's just compensation clause." @default.
- W46286497 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W46286497 creator A5024220309 @default.
- W46286497 date "1991-01-01" @default.
- W46286497 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
- W46286497 title "The Hidden Structure of Takings Law" @default.
- W46286497 hasPublicationYear "1991" @default.
- W46286497 type Work @default.
- W46286497 sameAs 46286497 @default.
- W46286497 citedByCount "3" @default.
- W46286497 countsByYear W462864972021 @default.
- W46286497 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
- W46286497 hasAuthorship W46286497A5024220309 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C2776040635 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C2777538416 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C2777828199 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C2778449503 @default.
- W46286497 hasConcept C48764862 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C144024400 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C17744445 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C190253527 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C199539241 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C2776040635 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C2777538416 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C2777828199 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C2778272461 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C2778449503 @default.
- W46286497 hasConceptScore W46286497C48764862 @default.
- W46286497 hasLocation W462864971 @default.
- W46286497 hasOpenAccess W46286497 @default.
- W46286497 hasPrimaryLocation W462864971 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W1500841222 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W151347764 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W1522666978 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W1575887237 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W1587397077 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W15990418 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W1605532293 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W1864539251 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W2068037424 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W2134833440 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W2258538930 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W2260570332 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W2287004156 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W2592909930 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W2767794485 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W308039497 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W3122267712 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W3123772222 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W3123853121 @default.
- W46286497 hasRelatedWork W1688005183 @default.
- W46286497 isParatext "false" @default.
- W46286497 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W46286497 magId "46286497" @default.
- W46286497 workType "article" @default.