Articles

The Sad Perversity of Eminent Domain

May 22, 2008 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

The Cato Institute's weblog has a very interesting post by Tim Lee on the perverse incentives created by eminent domain law: why businesses now sometimes dread the possibility of good economic times. … ...

Articles

Eminent Domain Talk at The Dole Institute

May 21, 2008 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

by Timothy Sandefur I will be speaking at the Dole Institute in Lawrence, Kansas, on Wednesday, discussing eminent domain and property rights after Kelo v. New London. … ...

Articles

Ilya Somin on Prop. 99 in The L.A. Times

May 19, 2008 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

Prof. Ilya Somin has an article in the L.A. Times today, about the government-written Prop. 99. Check it out on The Volokh Conspiracy. … ...

Articles

Eminent Domain Abuse in Birmingham, AL

May 16, 2008 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

by Timothy Sandefur Our friend David T. Beito has a very interesting post about eminent domain abuse in Birmingham, Alabama. … ...

Articles

Cal Supremes reject opportunity to check Coastal Commission's power-grab

May 14, 2008 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

The California Supreme Court denied review in a case called Douda v. California Coastal Commission. In this case, the Doudas sued the California Coastal Commission, after the Commission denied their permit to build a house on property located in the Santa Monica Mountains.  Over Los Angeles's objections, the Coastal Commission unilaterall ...

Articles

My interview with Mark Schneidman

May 13, 2008 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

by Timothy Sandefur I was recently interviewed about eminent domain in California, and about Propositions 98 and 99, for Mark Schneidman's radio show, Radio Real Estate. It will air Monday morning at 11, and again on the next Monday at 9pm and Saturday at 2. … ...

Articles

What Would Proposition 99 Do?

May 09, 2008 | By PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION

by Timothy Sandefur Many people are under the misimpression that Proposition 99—the ballot initiative supported by a coalition of government groups—would protect homes from seizure through eminent domain. The fact is that it would not, except perhaps in extremely rare circumstances. Although the initiative declares that government would not be ...