Takings Rule Statement
A government taking typically arises under the police power which affords broad discretion to regulate health, safety, and the welfare of the people
A regulation is different from a taking
Exaction
The government may impose an exaction or demand in exchange for a benefit conferred by the government
(think the Gov is requiring a developer to give land for a new park)
Exaction Elements
If the government takes private property and transfers it to another private owner, what must the challenger prove?
Challenger must prove that the transfer is not rationally related to any conceivable public purpose
STEVE gets my land instead of me? HOW IS THAT related to any CONCEIVE (rhymes with Steve) public purpose??
Penn Central Factors to determine if a regulation is a taking
A government regulation is a per-se taking when:
2. total loss of economic value
Which amendment contains the takings clause?
The 5th A
Liberty includes:
Property Includes:
How much process?
Equal protection suspect class
Government must prove least restrictive means to achieve compelling
Equal protection quasi-suspect
Government must prove substantial related to important
How can the government regulate in public and designated forums?
Time, place, manner IF
Content neutral
Narrowly tailored important government interest
Leave open alternative channels
How can the government regulate in limited and non-public forums?
2. Reasonably related to legit gov.
Content Neutral: Intermediate
Content-Neutral Regulation: Symbolic Speech/Expressive Conduct
(ie The freedom of speech can extend to symbolic acts or expressive conduct undertaken to communicate an idea, although the government may regulate such conduct if the regulation is narrowly tailored to an important government interest, and is unrelated to the suppression of ideas.)
Speech and Conduct Initial Rule Statement
Presumptively unconstitutional to place burdens on speech because of its content (except unprotected speech)
Lemon Test
Can the government deny benefits or impose a restriction on someone based on their religious beliefs?
Technically, yes, if there is a compelling interest. However, the Supreme Court has never found an interest so compelling that it justifies such action
The government cannot require employees to take a religious oath, states may not exclude clerics from holding public office, and courts may not declare a religious belief to be false. What clause is this?
Free exercise clause.
10th A
Fed virtually unlimited power to regulate. Congress may regulate states so long as exercising enumerated power
Dormant CC
States may not discriminate against interstate commerce unless necessary compelling and no reasonable non-discriminatory alternative
Under Dormant CC, what if the state action is non-discriminatory on its face but yet still burdens interstate commerce?
Valid only if important state interest unreasonable burden on commerce
Under Dormant CC, what if state action operates as a tariff or trade barrier?
Unconstitutional per-se
When does SCOTUS have original jx?
2. ambassador, public ministers, and consuls