Abstract
In a world of "Hobbesian stick[s]" and "Lockean bundle[s]," analytical confusion should be expected. Indeed, critics describe the world of federal takings jurisprudence as "an unworkable muddle," as "a jumble of confusing holdings," and as a body of law existing in "doctrinal and conceptual disarray." Since the United States Supreme Court first considered the regulatory takings issue in Mugler v. Kansas, the Court's inconsistent application of the doctrine has largely conformed to criticism. Governed by abstruse metaphors' and ad hoc analysis, the Court acknowledges its imprecision 9 and often relies upon it.
Recommended Citation
Michael A. Culpepper,
The Strategic Alternative: How State Takings Statutes May Resolve the Unanswered Questions of Palazzolo,
36
U. Rich. L. Rev.
509
(2002).
Available at:
https://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview/vol36/iss2/10