Friday, April 16, 2010
On the news of Justice Stevens' retirement announcement, I linked to an article by John Echeverria that makes a generally positive portrayal of Justice Stevens' overall legacy in the area of property law. The Economist, however, focuses on his Opinion for the Court in Kelo, with a thumbs-down. On its American politics blog is the article Kelo: The worst decision of Justice Stevens. It begins:
IN A long and distinguished career, Justice Stevens wrote many decisions that I applaud. . . .
But his opinion in Kelo v New London (2005) was simply terrible. . . .
The article goes on to say: "This massively expanded the government's power of eminent domain." Most legal scholars would probably disagree with that statement, at least with respect to the Berman and Midkiff precedents. It continues with a description of the backlash and speculates that then-Governor Janet Napolitano's veto of an Arizona anti-Kelo measure would be a problem for her should she be nominated for the Court vacancy.
This blog is an Amazon affiliate. Help support Land Use Prof Blog by making purchases through Amazon links on this site at no cost to you.
- Jamie Baker Roskie on Uber Goes to the State House Seeking Preemption of Local Government Control
- Stephen R. Miller on Why are building inspectors so often on the take?
- Josh Hightree on What makes people leave rural areas, and what makes them stay
- Jessica Shoemaker on What makes people leave rural areas, and what makes them stay
- Jamie Baker Roskie on Why are building inspectors so often on the take?
- What to make of the fierce new debate over the efficacy of California's energy codes?
- The W&L Top 100 Law Review Rankings and the Land Use Law Scholar
- CFP: 2015 Future of Places Conference (lead-in to Habitat III) in Stockholm: Deadline of April 15
- Water Down Under: A Report from Australia by Barbara Cosens: Post 7: Conjunctive Management Down Under
- Interior unveils final rule governing fracking regulations on public lands