Constitutional Law
Jan. 29, 2025
It is finally time to get rid of Penn Central
Two COVID-era cases from Michigan challenge the Supreme Court's murky standards for when government regulations amount to property takings.
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.
It is time for the United States Supreme Court to face reality: No one likes its decision in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104 (1978). Penn Central is the case the Supreme Court has called its "polestar" in regulatory takings cases; in other words, it is the guiding light that is supposed to show the way to the answer when regulations are challenged as takings under the Fifth Amendment.
If you are late to the...
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