The Right to Own Property: Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Fourth Congress, First Session, on S. 605, a Bill to Establish a Uniform and More Efficient Federal Process for Protecting Property Owners' Rights Guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment, Washington, DC; Salt Lake City, UT; and Washington, DC, April 6, July 3, and October 18, 1995, 4. sējumsU.S. Government Printing Office, 1996 - 402 lappuses |
No grāmatas satura
1.–5. rezultāts no 100.
2. lappuse
... Supreme Court rulings. The bill codifies and clarifies the area of takings law and court jurisdiction to enable the property owner to vindicate his rights; requires that all Federal agencies examine proposed regulations to assess the ...
... Supreme Court rulings. The bill codifies and clarifies the area of takings law and court jurisdiction to enable the property owner to vindicate his rights; requires that all Federal agencies examine proposed regulations to assess the ...
10. lappuse
... Supreme Court decision has ever come anywhere close to upholding or maintaining the doctrine which is embodied in the legislation before this com- mittee . That legislation provides , that , regardless of any of those other factors ...
... Supreme Court decision has ever come anywhere close to upholding or maintaining the doctrine which is embodied in the legislation before this com- mittee . That legislation provides , that , regardless of any of those other factors ...
16. lappuse
... courts have applied , contrary to this bill , for quite a while , particularly since the Penn Central case decided by the Supreme Court , is you look to the aggregate of the property owner's interest , not to a sin- gle portion of it ...
... courts have applied , contrary to this bill , for quite a while , particularly since the Penn Central case decided by the Supreme Court , is you look to the aggregate of the property owner's interest , not to a sin- gle portion of it ...
17. lappuse
... Supreme Court has explained , the Government's right to take private property for public use is the right , obviously , of emi- nent domain , the thing that most people think about , and it , " ap- pertains to every independent ...
... Supreme Court has explained , the Government's right to take private property for public use is the right , obviously , of emi- nent domain , the thing that most people think about , and it , " ap- pertains to every independent ...
18. lappuse
... Supreme Court has developed a body of law around the question of constitutional takings . Very oversimplified , the Court has held that no taking occurs where a regulation promotes health , safety , morals , and government welfare . Or ...
... Supreme Court has developed a body of law around the question of constitutional takings . Very oversimplified , the Court has held that no taking occurs where a regulation promotes health , safety , morals , and government welfare . Or ...
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
33 percent acres ADLER administrative agency action American apply CHAIRMAN City Clean Water Act Committee common law Congress Constitution contract costs County Court of Federal create decision economic Endangered Species Act environment erty example farm farmers Federal Claims Federal Government Fifth Amendment going government regulation habitat harm homeowners impact individual interest issue jurisdiction Justice landowners legislation litigation Lucas LUDWISZEWSKI MARZULLA ment million nuisance exception nuisance law Omnibus Property Rights pensation permit pollution private property owners private property rights problems prop property owners Property Rights Act property values proposed public rights question recognized regulatory takings require compensation restrictions result safety SCHMIDT Section 404 Senator BIDEN Senator DEWINE Senator THURMOND standard statute Supreme Court Takings Clause Thank tion Title U.S. SENATOR U.S. Supreme Court Utah Utah County Utah Lake water rights wetlands WILKINS
Populāri fragmenti
54. lappuse - To the extent necessary to decision and when presented, the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine the meaning or applicability of the terms of an agency action.
166. lappuse - Amendment's guarantee [isj designed to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole,
54. lappuse - ... a) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; b) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; c) in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right...
54. lappuse - ... unwarranted by the facts to the extent that the facts are subject to trial de novo by the reviewing court. In making the foregoing determinations the court shall review the whole record or such portions thereof as may be cited by any party, and due account shall be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.
65. lappuse - Government hardly could go on if to some extent values incident to property could not be diminished without paying for every such change in the general law. As long recognized, some values are enjoyed under an implied limitation and must yield to the police power. But obviously the implied limitation must have its limits, or the contract and due process clauses are gone.
275. lappuse - Interior, in carrying out the provisions of this act, shall proceed in conformity with such laws, and nothing herein shall in any way affect any right of any State or of the Federal Government or of any landowner, appropriator, or user of water in, to, or from any interstate stream or the waters thereof...
60. lappuse - Court, quite simply, has been unable to develop any "set formula" for determining when "justice and fairness" require that economic injuries caused by public action be compensated by the government, rather than remain disproportionately concentrated on a few persons.
388. lappuse - Penn Central Transp. Co. v. City of New York, 438 US 104 (1978) and Benenson v.
191. lappuse - There is perhaps no more impenetrable jungle in the entire law than that which surrounds the word 'nuisance.
7. lappuse - Court has described the purpose of this clause in the following terms; "[The] Fifth Amendment's guarantee that private property shall not be taken for a public use without just compensation was designed to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.