[20050819]RS22227_产权“收入”：奥康纳法官的意见.pdf

1 The Takings Clause states: Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without justcompensation.”2 Both “takings cases” and “direct condemnation” cases are premised on the governments powerof eminent domain. The difference between the two is that a takings case is brought by theproperty owner, who argues that a government action has effectively taken his property byeminent domain, as by excessive regulation, even though the government has not formallyinvoked the power. By contrast, a direct condemnation suit is brought by the government andexpressly acknowledges that the government is invoking eminent domain to take property andmust compensate. Congressional Research Service The Library of CongressCRS Report for CongressReceived through the CRS WebOrder Code RS22227August 19, 2005Property Rights “Takings”: JusticeOConnors Opinionsname redactedLegislative AttorneyAmerican Law DivisionSummaryWhen Justice OConnor ascended to the Supreme Court, expectations were that shewould adhere to the conservative line and generally uphold the property rights positionover the governments in Fifth Amendment “takings” cases. This did not happen.Instead, in this area as well as others, she