English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The law of takings, with its ever expanding subject matter, is a sprawling affair with little intellectual coherence. Takings now include, at the very least, the following roughly-defined categories: (1) government or government-authorized physical occupation of private property;' (2) government regulation of the use or disposition of property still owned, albeit in truncated form, by private individuals;2 and (3) the imposition of price structures intended (ideally) to limit the monopoly power of public utilities while providing their owners a reasonable rate of return.3 The standards of review applied to these takings correspond to the type of case. Exacting (if not quite strict) scrutiny is required whenever the government permanently dispossesses an owner of a property interest. Rational basis review regrettably seems to be the order of the day for regulatory takings, even though this prohibition has been frayed a bit around the edges in land use cases.4 Last, some form of intermediate scrutiny is applied in rate of return cases; that is, courts allow the government substantial discretion over the mechanics of rate-setting, so long

Takings, Exclusivity and Speech: The Legacy of PruneYard v Robins