Homeworks academic service


An interpretation of the us 5th amendment regarding private property and rights

In Kelo v City of New London, the Court, voting 5 to 4, upheld a city plan to condemn homes in a acre blue-collar residential neighborhood.

Privacy & Property Rights

Justice Stevens, writing for the Court, found this donation of property to a developer to be a "public use. The Takings Clause Private property shall not be taken for a public use, without just compensation. Should affected individuals or corporations be compensated whenever the actions of government diminish property values?

If so, should people whose property values have increased as the result of governmental action have to cough up the increase? Should the requirement of just compensation depend upon whether the government was taking action to prevent a harm or to secure a public benefit? Lucas contended that the action of the S.

  • While the Fifth Amendment only applies to the federal government, the identical text in the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly applies this due process requirement to the states as well;
  • Congressional statutes outline the means by which a federal grand jury shall be impaneled;
  • At common-law, a grand jury consists of between 12 and 23 members;
  • Self-Incrimination The Fifth Amendment also protects criminal defendants from having to testify if they may incriminate themselves through the testimony;
  • Should affected individuals or corporations be compensated whenever the actions of government diminish property values?
  • If a 32-month moratorium on all development is not enough to be a per se taking see Tahoe Preservation Council , what about a 10-year moratorium?

Coastal Commission rendered his property valueless? What value might it have?

  1. The Court split 4 to 4 on the question of whether courts could ever be financially liable for a taking. What might be examples of non-public uses?
  2. What value might it have? Should the requirement of just compensation depend upon whether the government was taking action to prevent a harm or to secure a public benefit?
  3. Lucas contended that the action of the S.
  4. Should the requirement of just compensation depend upon whether the government was taking action to prevent a harm or to secure a public benefit?
  5. California in has refused to incorporate the Grand Jury system to all of the states, most states have independently decided to retain a similar form of Grand Jury, and currently, all but two states Connecticut and Pennsylvania have the grand jury. What options does South Carolina have after the Court's decision in Lucas?

In oral argument, Justice Blackmun asked the attorney for Lucas: What options does South Carolina have after the Court's decision in Lucas? Is Dolan just an "exactions" case, or does it have significance for other types of takings cases?

Does the "rough proportionality" test of Dolan strike you as one that courts will find easy to administer?

Fifth Amendment

What is the "private property" that government may not take without just compensation? Does it include personal property such as a car? Does it include intellectual property such as rights under copyright law in a song?

Presumably, if the use for which property is taken is not "public," the taking violates the Constitution--even if compensation is paid. What might be examples of non-public uses?

  1. Coastal Commission rendered his property valueless? Does the "rough proportionality" test of Dolan strike you as one that courts will find easy to administer?
  2. At common-law, a grand jury consists of between 12 and 23 members. If so, should people whose property values have increased as the result of governmental action have to cough up the increase?
  3. What value might it have? Justice Stevens, writing for the Court, found this donation of property to a developer to be a "public use.
  4. The Fifth Amendment right does not extend to an individual's voluntarily prepared business papers because the element of compulsion is lacking.
  5. They may not, however, conduct "fishing expeditions" or hire individuals not already employed by the government to locate testimony or documents.

May the government condemn property and turn it over to a private developer? If a month moratorium on all development is not enough to be a per se taking see Tahoe Preservation Councilwhat about a year moratorium?

Privacy & Property Rights

Is the majority right is applying the Penn Central analysis to all bans on development called "temporary" by regulators? The landowners argued that the Florida courts had redefined their land boundaries, which used to extend all the way to the tide line, in such a way as to constitute a taking of their property.

The Court, 8 to 0 Justice Stevens not participating because he owned a Florida oceanfront condoheld that the state's actions were not a taking requiring compensation to the owners, noting that the beach erosion project could be seen as an attempt to preserve property values. The Court split 4 to 4 on the question of whether courts could ever be financially liable for a taking.