Written by Sutherland Institute
May 13, 2005
This Court’s standard of review in regulatory takings cases should be applied in eminent domain cases. The reasons that call for heightened scrutiny when a regulatory taking is alleged apply with equal force when the government seeks to condemn private property through its eminent domain powers. While the public purposes that might be served by eminent domain are the same as those that might be served through the general police power, the eminent domain power is limited by the public use requirement of the 5th Amendment. This limitation serves to protect property owners from being singled out, recognizes that fair market value will often not make property owners whole, assures that the fundamental right to exclude will not be violated without a compelling public purpose, and guards against the abuse of public authority and the corruption of our democratic process.
Read the full PDF version of the report by clicking the button below.
Read More
Benefits of federalism: gambling regulations
This term, the U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to take a case that would allow states to control the practice of prediction markets, which include gambling. Whatever the other legal issues it must consider in making that decision, the Court should keep in mind the benefits of federalism.
Why parental choice in Utah Fits All Scholarship is real accountability
The program intentionally puts parents in charge of academic accountability, or their child’s outcomes. That’s the right thing to do.
Who runs elections best? A 50-state ranking | Chris McIsaac
Which states have the strongest election policies? And what can they teach us about how elections should really be run? R Street Institute’s Chris McIsaac joins Defending Ideas to discuss a new 50-state election scorecard.

