Wednesday, June 26, 2013
The always-insightful Tim Mulvaney has updated his post on Koontz over at Environmental Law Prof. If you haven't been following the case, Tim gives a clear outline of the dispute, explains what's at stake, and discusses the holding. His takeaway:
This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a divided decision in Koontz v. St. John’s River Water Management District that expands Takings Clause protections for landowners. I raised the possibility last October that the case could serve as a vehicle for the Court to provide some sense of clarity to the field of takings jurisprudence that would benefit both landowners and government regulators alike, yet it appears on my first read of the 5-4 opinion that the Court has failed in this regard. Moreover, while the decision is undoubtedly a victory for proponents of a conception of property grounded in individual autonomy and control, there may be some silver lining for those who understand property as a socially contingent institution.