In March, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments for
Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, in which the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) asserted that a California law allowing union organizers entry onto agricultural private property for up to 120 days a year constitutes a “taking” under the U.S. Constitution. For deregulation advocates like PLF, the case presents a new opportunity for the justices to empower the Takings Clause to be a more central constitutional doctrine buffering private property from what it views as overreaching state authority. But it also asks the court, implicitly, if it remains committed to the principle, celebrated by conservative Justices William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia, of “federalism,” that is, devolving power from the federal government to the states. Efforts to empower property rights in the federal courts usurp the states’ rights to determine their own property laws.
Court could limit inspections, OK unwanted persons
mcdonoughvoice.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from mcdonoughvoice.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
The Center Square: Let Kentucky thrive by removing unnecessary state laws that kill jobs
pacificlegal.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from pacificlegal.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.