By: Richard G. Rumrell

Will the United States Supreme Court uphold our Country’s traditional principle of safeguarding property rights?

With the launch of RUMRELL LAW’s new website we are also launching this Property Rights Blog. These are personal opinions and not that of the Law Firm.

The goal of the Property Rights Blog is to provide regular commentary on property rights issues in Florida and throughout the United States. From time to time we may even look at how other countries are dealing with some of these issues.

Our comments may include cases handled by RUMRELL LAW. But the focus is to open up your thinking on the important issues affecting Property Rights today.

We will look at current and other significant cases from Florida and other jurisdictions and give you our personal comments. We may also comment from time to time on other people?Äôs opinions on property rights issues. We hope that we may create a place to debate the real issues facing Property owners: from those who rent their vacation homes on a short-term basis to businesses who are having difficulty getting permits to create jobs in a community.

We also hope to stimulate you into thinking about why private property rights should continue to be protected from arbitrary or onerous government intrusion as well as illegal actions of others.

We will not be advocating any Tea Rebellions but instead will offer some lively questioning of what is happening in the protection of Private Property Rights.

The Framers of the U.S. Constitution (http://myloc.gov/exhibitions/creatingtheus)¬?recognized the need to safeguard property rights. Private property was always considered to be a fundamental right.

But some commentators have noted changes now and on the near horizon.

Tim Sandefur writes in the National Law Journal:
“[T]oday, the nation’s intellectual elite, and particularly judges, have rejected the traditional principles underlying property rights. They see property as simply a privilege the government can alter or rearrange at will. America’s founders believed that a person’s right to own, buy, sell and use property was a timeless moral principle, not a temporary expedient that changes based on who wins elections. Hence the clash between today’s lawmakers, who want maximum power to manipulate property, and permanent constitutional principles designed to protect each individual’s right to pursue happiness.

Will the United States Supreme Court uphold our Country’s traditional principle of safeguarding property rights?

The United States Supreme Court will have a chance to uphold our Country’s traditional principle of safeguarding property rights this term in the case of Stop the Beach Renourishment v. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the first taking case to come before Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Samuel Alito and Sonia Sotomayor.

The United States Supreme Court will be reviewing a decision of the Florida Supreme Court which held that a state statute which prohibits “beach re-nourishment” without a permit did not effect a taking of littoral (beachfront) property, even though it altered the long-standing rights of the owners to accretion on their land and direct access to the ocean.

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether the Florida court?Äôs reversal of more than 100 years of Florida law was a judicial taking, and whether the Florida court?Äôs decision violated due process. The lower court?Äôs decision is a classic example of judicial activism.

Even though it is not the Court’s role to legislate, the Florida Supreme Court wiped out a common law right when it summarily altered the definition of littoral property that was in effect for almost one hundred years. An excellent analysis of the issues in this case can be found in the Amicus Brief of the Cato Institute, NFIB Legal Center, and Pacific Legal Foundation.

How do feel about protecting Private Property Rights? Do you still believe that a jury of twelve persons is necessary when Government wants your property?

More to come…

Sources

Tim Sandefur View
OPINION: Setting boundaries for property rights, National Law Journal View
United States Supreme Court View
Amicus Brief of the CATO INSTITUTE, NFIB LEGAL CENTER, AND PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION View