Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 05 MARCH 2024

The Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause – Does It Mean What It Says?

Ballard Spahr LLP
Ballard Spahr LLP
Contributor
Ballard Spahr LLP

Ballard Spahr LLP

Ballard Spahr LLP, an AmLaw 100 law firm with 19 US offices, serves clients in more than 50...

View firm profile
Explore more from Ballard Spahr LLP

This term, the United States Supreme Court is poised to address whether the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause provides an independent cause of action for plaintiffs seeking redress against states for takings.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

This term, the United States Supreme Court is poised to address whether the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause provides an independent cause of action for plaintiffs seeking redress against states for takings.

The Fifth Amendment provides: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." As any law student will tell you, this simple clause means that when the government takes private property, the U.S. Constitution dictates that the government must provide the owner with just compensation. In DeVillier v. Texas, the Court will address this clause head-on, and decide whether the constitutional text — in and of itself — provides litigants with a federal cause of action against states who "take" their property. The Court's decision will have far-reaching implications for litigation against states, and property owners' ability to vindicate their rights in federal court.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from