Pacific Legal Foundation Symposium on the 100th Anniversary of Euclid v. Ambler Realty
Next year is the 100th anniversary of Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty, the Supreme Court decision upholding exclusionary zoning. I think Euclid is one of the worst supreme Court decisions ever, and exclusionary zoning – and the resulting massive housing shortage of which it is the biggest cause – is the biggest property rights issue of our time. In a recent article, In a recent Texas Law Review article, Josh Braver and i argue that exclusionary zoning violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, and outline ways in which a combination of litigation and political action can be used to combat them. See also our much shorter non-academic article in the Atlantic.
Even many who don’t agree with that position can recognize now is a good time to reconsider Euclid and its legacy. Thus, I am happy to announce that the Pacific Legal Foundation – a major public interest law firm specializing in property rights issues – is sponsoring a symposium on the 100th anniversary of Euclid, and soliciting proposals. They are organizing it together with the Mercatus Center and the Journal of Law, Economics, and Policy. Here is the announcement:
Next year marks the 100th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., where the Court approved of municipalities’ use of their “police powers” to enact zoning ordinances excluding lawful activities from certain districts and segregating residential housing based on the housing’s effects on neighboring properties. The effects of Euclid have been pervasive, since virtually all American cities and towns divide themselves into land-use districts through these public-welfare zoning ordinances.
In Euclid, land that an owner had intended to sell for industrial purposes was rezoned for residential use by a Cleveland suburb, resulting in an alleged decrease in land value of approximately 75 percent. The Court’s decision provided an unqualified endorsement of the practice of land-use regulation under the government’s police powers using a creative application of nuisance principles. The Court noted that “a nuisance may be merely a right thing in the wrong place, like a pig in the parlor instead of the barnyard,” and, going beyond the facts of the case, singled-out apartment buildings as “parasites” amidst neighborhoods of “private” family homes.
For the past 100 years, scholars have debated Euclid’s effect on housing in America and the resulting tension between states’ police power protection of public welfare and constitutional property rights, due process, and equal protection. The approaching 100th anniversary of the Court’s decision presents a new opportunity to take a fresh look at the decision, its sig
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
