Skip to main content
LIRA@BC Law

Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States recognized that any government action that interferes with the enjoyment and use of private property—whether permanent or temporary in duration—can give rise to a claim under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Yet dicta in the decision left many pondering whether significantly different tests will apply depending on the duration of the government invasion. This Article reviews the state of the law regarding temporary physical takings both before and after Arkansas Game & Fish with particular regard to the test applicable to physical invasions of limited duration, and to what degree the duration of the government invasion should influence the court’s resolution of a takings claim. The Article concludes that drawing a distinction between so-called “permanent” and “temporary” invasions, based solely on the duration of the government occupation, is meaningless when determining liability under the Takings Clause.

Files

File nameDate UploadedVisibilityFile size
02_hodges.pdf
8 Sep 2022
Public
524 kB

Metrics

Metadata

  • Subject
    • Constitutional Law

    • Environmental Law

    • Natural Resources Law

    • Property Law and Real Estate

    • Water Law

  • Journal title
    • Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review

  • Volume
    • 41

  • Issue
    • 2

  • Pagination
    • 365

  • Date submitted

    8 September 2022