The Demise of Federal Takings Litigation
Sterk, Stewart E.
Citation analytics
How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this journal article
Most recently cited by2
- 2019Knick v. Twp. of Scott U.S.
- 2007McNamara v. City of Rittman 6th Cir.
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Abstract
For more than twenty years the Supreme Court has held that a federal takings claim is not ripe until the claimant seeks compensation in state court. The Court's recent opinion in San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City & County of San Francisco establishes that the federal full faith and credit statute applies to federal takings claims. The Court itself recognized that its decision limits the availability of a federal forum for takings claims. In fact, however, claim preclusion doctrine-not considered or discussed by the Court-may result in more stringent limits on federal court review of takings claims than the Court's opinion anticipates.
The counterintuitive result-that federal takings claims must be litigated in state court-plays a critical role in the Supreme Court's emerging takings jurisprudence, which largely delegates to state courts the primary responsibility for policing land use regulation.