Search

The article focuses on the reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. City of New London which involved disturbances around the country. The paper also explores how best to think about Susette Kelo once the initial reactions subsides. The Court invited states and localities to consider carefully the benefits and burdens of using eminent domain for economic development. The Court's ruling that the scope of public use is coextensive with the police power has rejected the argument that private benefits generated by a condemnation render it constitutionally suspect.

The article examines the U.S. Supreme Court's lack of clarity about the economic projections of the Penn Central test in contrast to recent decisions from the Federal Claims Court and the Federal Circuit Court to show how those courts have advanced the framework of the test and measurement of damages. Some section of this paper review conducted cases to show how these courts have examined and relied on the economic underpinnings of this test in recent years. The U.S. Supreme Court implies that regulatory takings do not require that all value be eliminated before a citizen is entitled to compensation.

An essay is presented on government takings and the potential re-squaring of non-rectangular property lots by the government as a means of boosting property tax revenues in the aftermath of a natural disaster, focusing on the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the case Kelo v. City of New London. The value of rectangular property lots is addressed, along with the Takings Clause which is contained in the Fifth Amendment to the nation's Constitution. Several state laws on takings are mentioned.

The article presents information on the Ashcroft v. Iqbal court case. The case is related to constitutional claim against high ranking federal officials discriminatory treatment of detainees based on their race, religion, and national origin after the September 11, 2003 terrorist attack in the U.S. The Court has rejected the claims that officials could be held individually liable for the discrimination.

The article presents information on the U.S. Supreme court case Ashcroft v. Iqbal. The case was filed against federal government officials for adopting a post-9/11 policy of classifying Arab Muslim detainees because of their race, religion, and national origin. The case set out a new roadmap for federal district court judges.

The article discusses legal issues related to regional urban planning and sustainable development in the U.S. during the 21st Century. In the U.S., urban planning and control of land development is largely a function of local government. But in 1926, during the case of Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., the U.S. Supreme Court gave constitutional sanction to local comprehensive city zoning of urban development. There is growing awareness that coordinated urban planning policy at the metropolitan level can play in creating higher-density and prosperous urban core areas and it will build sustainable communities in the twenty-first century.

The article examines awarding a share in the gains to takees in the context of economic development projects. It also examines the current measures of compensation and considers justifications for awarding after value in the economic development context. It also discusses the need for a new conception of the Takings Clause in the context of economic development condemnations. In a 5-4 decision in Kelo v. City of New London, The U.S. Supreme Court has held that economic development is a "public purpose" for which a government may use its eminent domain power under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The article discusses issues raised after the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case "District of Columbia v. Heller." Prior to Heller, the principal point before courts and scholars was whether the Second Amendment secures an individual right to bear arms or only a right to bear arms when related to participation in an organized militia. In the case of Heller, the Court came down on the individual-rights side, by resolving about the extent to which the Second Amendment will constrain the power to regulate firearms. The two most important questions raised by that decision is at what extent firearms regulations should be justified in order to withstand constitutional attack, and whether the Second Amendment is applicable to the state and local laws.

The article provides information on the origin of zoning as well as the constitutional rationale outlined by the U.S. Supreme Court regarding private property rights. According to the author, the comprehensive plan is relevant to land use application since it allows the community to carry out essential fortification actions. In addition, the author noted that Supreme Court has approved and authorized the operation of the zoning committee as a legitimate and effective means to give emphasis on the quality of life of its citizens. It also discusses the implication of the insulation of single-family use in non-residential uses as well as the changes and sanctions imposed by the Court.

The article offers information on the U.S. Supreme Court Report for 2007-2008. According to the article, the Court has continued to impart and maintain its conservative stand on policies and predilections of major justices as well as reasserted its power to continuously enforce habeas rights. It also discusses the achievements and amendments carried out by the court regarding voting rights, election laws, employment and prisoner's rights as well as sovereign immunity. In addition, the author notes that the Court was able to settle the longstanding debate and issues regarding the Second Amendment's two clauses needed in national security.

The article focuses on the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the Garcetti versus Ceballos case. The Supreme Court says, public employees who make statements pursuant to their official job duties are not protected by the First Amendment and are subject to discipline by their employees. The decision feared those advocates of free speech and perceived that it would quell employee free speech. On the other hand, public employers hoped that the rolling would restore their control over the public workplace and eliminate further litigation.

The article focuses on the law that governs the implementation of the municipal plans underlying the use of eminent domain power for redevelopment in the U.S. According to the author, the vaunted comprehensive character of the municipal plans that so impressed U.S. Supreme Court Justice Paul Stevens and the Court's majority and formed the pillar on which the Kelo Court's reasoning are not enforceable. He added that resolution of the battle over people's constitutional rights in property necessarily requires a judicial taking of sides. He emphasized that the property owners losing their homes and businesses to modern redevelopment without full and fair compensation deserve better than what they have been getting from the United States Supreme Court.

The article underlines the meaning of "average reciprocity of advantage (ARA)." It is emphasized that even within the practice of land use law, lower court and Supreme Court decisions have obscured rather than illuminate the concept. It is posed that ARA will benefit from economic insight because the legal phrase calls for an evaluation of the benefits and burdens of a particular regulation. Moreover, in the absence of Supreme Court guidance, recent decisions in the Court of Federal Claims have forwarded opposing interpretations of ARA.

The article examines the public education law concerning post-secondary education in 2005-2006 in the U.S. The U.S. Supreme Court has given rulings in three major decisions related to student loan debt, eleventh amendment issue, and Solomon Amendment requiring higher education institutions that accept federal funds to provide access to military recruiters. Referring to various court cases, the article focuses on First Amendment rights of students which concerned with a strict scrutiny analysis held by the university and create a public forum.

The article presents information on various developments related to the 2005-2006 term of the U.S. Supreme Court. Due to thyroid cancer, William Rehnquist, chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, died. John G. Roberts replaced Rehnquist and gave his first verdict in a death penalty case. An overview of various rulings associated with private property rights, students' rights, environmental law, bankruptcy law, abortion, preemption, etc., is also presented. Information is also provided on the judges of the Supreme Court.

The article focuses on the controversy of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision regarding the Kelo v. City of New London which made several Americans dismayed and angered. The home of Susette Kelo, the petitioner, was seized and razed to convey the site to a municipally favored redeveloper, on the theory that redevelopment will increase revenues and wages, thus tending to revitalize the community. The case has inspired a widespread reaction by the public and press because it is a case of reductio ad absurdum, meaning that its premise is flawed in that it deems almost everything to be a public use.