I can’t remember, but ... isn’t this the second or third case Kagan has not taken part in ?
Color me surprised that any 0bama appointee would admit private property exists.
OMG RBG sounds almost Constitutional!
Government suing government. I guess we all win, or lose.
I suspect that the liberal justices may have joined in because the Federal government flooded a state forest. That makes it an environmental no-no.
I don’t see how the government can mandate we buy stuff but can’t take stuff. How is the first one not a taking?
I hope this ruling puts a damper on the efforts of environmentalists to return rivers to a “more natural flow”, periodically flooding areas to mimic the spring flood patterns that are now under human control. Deliberately flooding land and damaging it is going to cost you. This should slow down the rewilding of our rivers.
That it precisely why the takings clause is in the Constitution, to prevent that sort of abuse!
Poor California, they might see a rash of claims for past unconstitutional crimes.
As I recall, just in the last few days, a family was cheated out of the use of their oyster farm (Marin County, California) using this ploy (or the lame environmental or "global warming excuse," after being in business for several generations.
Time to talk to the Pacific Legal Foundation.
So what, they still took it.
I got this in an email == and it’s close enough to the subject to post it.
The Food Stamp Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is proud to be distributing the greatest amount of free meals and food stamps ever, to 46 million people.
Meanwhile, the National Park Service, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, asks us “Please Do Not Feed the Animals.” Their stated reason for the policy is because the animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves.
This ends today’s lesson.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.