U.S. Supreme Court,
Constitutional Law
Feb. 28, 2022
The regulatory taking conundrum
In a recent dissent from a denial of certiorari, Justice Clarence Thomas uttered this simple phrase: “If there is no such thing as a regulatory taking, we should say so. And if there is, we should make clear when one occurs.”
Michael M. Berger
Senior Counsel
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP
2049 Century Park East
Los Angeles , CA 90067
Phone: (310) 312-4185
Fax: (310) 996-6968
Email: mmberger@manatt.com
USC Law School
Michael M. Berger is senior counsel at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP, where he is co-chair of the Appellate Practice Group. He has argued four takings cases in the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a recent dissent from a denial of certiorari, Justice Clarence Thomas uttered this simple phrase: "If there is no such thing as a regulatory taking, we should say so. And if there is, we should make clear when one occurs." Bridge Aina Le'a v. State of Hawaii Land Use Commission, 141 S. Ct. 731 (Thomas, J, dissenting)...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In