Open AccessKnick and the Elephant in the Courtroom
Author(s) -
R. S. Radford
Publication year - 2021
Language(s) - English
DOI - 10.37419/jpl.v7.i4.2
Subject(s) - law , commission , plaintiff , supreme court , political science , state (computer science) , compensation (psychology) , economic justice , just compensation , sociology , psychology , social psychology , algorithm , computer science
In Knick v. Township of Scott, the Supreme Court corrected one of the most egregious and inexplicable blunders of its 230-year history. For more than three decades, plaintiffs who alleged a violation of the Takings Clause by state or local governments were barred from suing for compensation in federal court. The source of this prohibition was Justice Blackmun’s 1985 opinion in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City—a decision that most scholars and practitioners believe rested on a fundamental misunderstanding of both constitutional text and legal procedure.