This Article proposes a new approach, rooted in property law, for Native American faith communities to protect their sacred sites.
Incomplete property rights are common across a range of natural resources such as fisheries and groundwater. This paper takes a hedonic approach to understanding how three core features of prior appropriation water rights in Kansas—access, allocation, and seniority—confer value to irrigated farmland.
At its meeting on October 19 and 20, 2023, the Council reviewed and discussed Council Drafts of the following projects and approved drafts and portions of drafts as listed.
This Article considers the Agua Caliente groundwater litigation a decade since its inception and outlines the present opportunity to reimagine the role of tribes in groundwater management.
Federal law bars housing discrimination against a person with a disability. Under the Fair Housing Act, landlords and sellers must provide “reasonable accommodations” to give someone with a disability “equal opportunity” to rent or buy a home. These cases examine whether the FHA requires landlords to accept so-called Section 8 vouchers from tenants who are too disabled to work.
U.S. Supreme Court Decisions, Both Decided May 25, 2023, Protect Private Property Owners from Overreach by Local (Tax Sale) and Federal (Wetlands) Regulators: Tyler v. Hennepin County and Sackett v. EPA
This piece analyzes two U.S. Supreme Court rulings that expand the constitutional protections afforded private property owners in two regulatory contexts—tax sales administered by local governments and the EPA’s classification of wetlands as “waters under the United States” under the Clean Water Act.
This Article tells an untold history of the American title registry—a colonial bureaucratic innovation that, though overlooked and understudied, constitutes one of the most fundamental elements of the U.S. property system today.
This article contends that the term “property” as used in the Takings Clause is a group of rights, the essential being the right to possess, the right to exclude others, the right to alienate, and most saliently, the right to beneficial use.
The Supreme Court ruled that Hennepin County’s actions violated the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause, which bars the government from taking private property for public use without adequately compensating the property owner.
Recent changes in the law and the oil and gas industry both justify a reexamination of forced pooling on constitutional takings grounds. This Article will therefore take a fresh look at forced pooling schemes through the lens of modern takings jurisprudence.