Library Catalog
Amazon cover image
Image from Amazon.com

Takings : Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain / Richard A. Epstein.

By: Material type: TextTextPublisher: Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press, [2009]Copyright date: ©1985Description: 1 online resource (376 p.)Content type:
Media type:
Carrier type:
ISBN:
  • 9780674036550
Subject(s): DDC classification:
  • 347.303252
LOC classification:
  • KF5599 ǂb E67 1985eb
Other classification:
  • online - DeGruyter
Online resources:
Contents:
Frontmatter -- Preface -- Contents -- PART I. Philosophical Preliminaries -- 1. A Tale of Two Pies -- 2. Hobbesian Man, Lockean World -- 3. The Integrity of Constitutional Text -- PART II. Takings Prima Facie -- 4. Takings and Torts -- 5. Partial Takings: The Unity of Ownership -- 6. Possession and Use -- 7. Rights of Disposition and Contract -- 8. Taking from Many: Liability Rules, Regulations, and Taxes -- PART III. Justifications for Takings -- 9. The Police Power: Ends -- 10. The Police Power: Means -- 11. Consent and Assumption of Risk -- PART IV. Public Use and Just Compensation -- 12. Public Use -- 13. Explicit Compensation -- 14. Implicit In-Kind Compensation -- 15. Property and the Common Pool -- 16. Tort -- 17. Regulation -- 18. Taxation -- 19. Transfer Payments and Welfare Rights -- CONCLUSION. Philosophical Implications -- Index of Cases -- General Index
Summary: If legal scholar Richard Epstein is right, then the New Deal is wrong, if not unconstitutional. Epstein reaches this sweeping conclusion after making a detailed analysis of the eminent domain, or takings, clause of the Constitution, which states that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. In contrast to the other guarantees in the Bill of Rights, the eminent domain clause has been interpreted narrowly. It has been invoked to force the government to compensate a citizen when his land is taken to build a post office, but not when its value is diminished by a comprehensive zoning ordinance.Epstein argues that this narrow interpretation is inconsistent with the language of the takings clause and the political theory that animates it. He develops a coherent normative theory that permits us to distinguish between permissible takings for public use and impermissible ones. He then examines a wide range of government regulations and taxes under a single comprehensive theory. He asks four questions: What constitutes a taking of private property? When is that taking justified without compensation under the police power? When is a taking for public use? And when is a taking compensated, in cash or in kind?Zoning, rent control, progressive and special taxes, workers’ compensation, and bankruptcy are only a few of the programs analyzed within this framework. Epstein’s theory casts doubt upon the established view today that the redistribution of wealth is a proper function of government. Throughout the book he uses recent developments in law and economics and the theory of collective choice to find in the eminent domain clause a theory of political obligation that he claims is superior to any of its modern rivals.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number URL Status Notes Barcode
eBook eBook Biblioteca "Angelicum" Pont. Univ. S.Tommaso d'Aquino Nuvola online online - DeGruyter (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Online access Not for loan (Accesso limitato) Accesso per gli utenti autorizzati / Access for authorized users (dgr)9780674036550

Frontmatter -- Preface -- Contents -- PART I. Philosophical Preliminaries -- 1. A Tale of Two Pies -- 2. Hobbesian Man, Lockean World -- 3. The Integrity of Constitutional Text -- PART II. Takings Prima Facie -- 4. Takings and Torts -- 5. Partial Takings: The Unity of Ownership -- 6. Possession and Use -- 7. Rights of Disposition and Contract -- 8. Taking from Many: Liability Rules, Regulations, and Taxes -- PART III. Justifications for Takings -- 9. The Police Power: Ends -- 10. The Police Power: Means -- 11. Consent and Assumption of Risk -- PART IV. Public Use and Just Compensation -- 12. Public Use -- 13. Explicit Compensation -- 14. Implicit In-Kind Compensation -- 15. Property and the Common Pool -- 16. Tort -- 17. Regulation -- 18. Taxation -- 19. Transfer Payments and Welfare Rights -- CONCLUSION. Philosophical Implications -- Index of Cases -- General Index

restricted access online access with authorization star

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec

If legal scholar Richard Epstein is right, then the New Deal is wrong, if not unconstitutional. Epstein reaches this sweeping conclusion after making a detailed analysis of the eminent domain, or takings, clause of the Constitution, which states that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. In contrast to the other guarantees in the Bill of Rights, the eminent domain clause has been interpreted narrowly. It has been invoked to force the government to compensate a citizen when his land is taken to build a post office, but not when its value is diminished by a comprehensive zoning ordinance.Epstein argues that this narrow interpretation is inconsistent with the language of the takings clause and the political theory that animates it. He develops a coherent normative theory that permits us to distinguish between permissible takings for public use and impermissible ones. He then examines a wide range of government regulations and taxes under a single comprehensive theory. He asks four questions: What constitutes a taking of private property? When is that taking justified without compensation under the police power? When is a taking for public use? And when is a taking compensated, in cash or in kind?Zoning, rent control, progressive and special taxes, workers’ compensation, and bankruptcy are only a few of the programs analyzed within this framework. Epstein’s theory casts doubt upon the established view today that the redistribution of wealth is a proper function of government. Throughout the book he uses recent developments in law and economics and the theory of collective choice to find in the eminent domain clause a theory of political obligation that he claims is superior to any of its modern rivals.

Mode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.

In English.

Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 06. Mrz 2024)