TAKINGS

Front Cover
Harvard University Press, Jan 1, 1985 - Law - 376 pages
2 Reviews

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.

  

What people are saying - Write a review

Review: Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain

User Review  - Charles David Edinger - Goodreads

TAKINGS by Dr. Richard A. Epstein is without question one of the most important books of recent history in the field of legal and Constitutional theory as they relate to private property and eminent ... Read full review

Review: Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain

User Review  - Michael - Goodreads

I know a lot of people that love, or would love, this book. I also know a lot of people who would completely dismiss it. Those who come to the table thinking that each person has an inalienable right ... Read full review

Contents

A Tale of Two Pies
3
Hobbesian Man Lockean World
7
The Integrity of Constitutional Text
19
Takings Prima Facie
33
Takings and Torts
35
Partial Takings The Unity of Ownership
57
Possession and Use
63
Rights of Disposition and Contract
74
Public Use and Just Compensation
159
Public Use
161
Explicit Compensation
182
Implicit InKind Compensation
195
Property and the Common Pool
216
Tort
229
Regulation
263
Taxation
283

Taking from Many Liability Rules Regulations and Taxes
93
Justifications for Takings
105
The Police Power Ends
107
The Police Power Means
126
Consent and Assumption of Risk
146
Transfer Payments and Welfare Rights
306
Philosophical Implications
331
Index of Cases
353
General Index
358
Copyright

Common terms and phrases

References to this book

All Book Search results »

About the author (1985)

Born in 1943, Richard A. Epstein graduated from Columbia in 1964 with a degree in philosophy. He continued his education at Oxford, earning a B.A. in law in 1966, and from there attended Yale, where he received an LL.B. in 1968. Following graduation Epstein joined the faculty at the University of Southern California, teaching there until 1972. He became a regular member of the faculty at the University of Chicago in 1973, where he was named James Parker Hall Professor in 1982 and Distinguished Service Professor in 1988. Richard Epstein writes extensively concerning the law. His works include Simple Rules for a Complex World (1995), Bargaining with the State (1993) and Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws (1992).

Bibliographic information