Search for: "State v. Blight" Results 201 - 220 of 370
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Sep 2011, 8:14 pm by Ilya Somin
While, certainly, not all members of these groups are poor or politically weak, a disproportionately large number are.Finally, in Part III I explain why the problem of abusive takings persists despite the wave of state reform laws adopted in response to the Supreme Court’s unpopular decision upholding economic development takings in Kelo v. [read post]
5 Jun 2015, 8:40 am
Even if Kelo is overruled and “economic development” takings are banned, blight condemnations of the kind upheld in the Supreme Court’s 1954 ruling in Berman v. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 6:21 am by Carlos A. Kelly
In 2006, the Florida Legislature enacted several statutes in response to the United States Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Kelo v. [read post]
24 May 2011, 5:31 am
Supreme Court's recent prison overcrowding case of Brown v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 8:20 am
State of New York, a case where the issue of condemnation blight was central to the court's decision on just compensation. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 9:58 am
Might Makes Blight In The New York Appellate Division - Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn v. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 11:33 pm by Josh Blackman
So long as those precedents remain on the books, the state can still engage in rampant eminent domain abuse. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 8:15 am by Ilya Somin
It is also likely that many more people rely on Roe (hundreds of thousands of women who have abortions every year) than rely on Berman (state and local governments engaged in “blight” condemnations). [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 1:29 pm
  But does that mean that the state is entitled to immediately crush your car or kill your dog? [read post]
15 Apr 2009, 9:38 am
  Little Pink House gives the backstory to the infamous Supreme Court eminent domain decision Kelo v. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 3:06 am by Walter Olson
” [Posner, chief judge, in People Who Care v. [read post]
24 Nov 2009, 7:54 am by Ashby Jones
New York State Urban Development Corp., ruled that it was lawful under the state's constitution for the state entity to seize the downtown Brooklyn land to improve blighted conditions. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:44 pm by admin
If the Court does find takings for purely economic development in non- blight areas to be constitutional under the federal Constitution, states will continue to have the ability to develop and implement expansive practices for takings under the state constitutions. [read post]